This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Linking Performance Appraisal Quality with
Employee Participation in Informal Learning
Activities through Psychological Empowerment
By
Aamer Waheed
CIIT/SP12-PMS-005/ISB
PhD ThesisIn
Management Sciences
COMSATS University Islamabad
Islamabad Campus - Pakistan
Fall, 2018
ii
COMSATS University Islamabad
Linking Performance Appraisal Quality with
Employee Participation in Informal Learning
Activities through Psychological Empowerment
A Thesis presented to
COMSATS University Islamabad
In partiall fullfilment
Of the requirement of the degree of
PhD Management Sciences
By
Aamer Waheed
CIIT/SP12-PMS-005/ISB
Fall, 2018
iii
Linking Performance Appraisal Quality withEmployee Participation in Informal LearningActivities through Psychological Empowerment
A Post Graduate thesis submitted to the department of Management Sciences
as partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of Degree of Ph.D in
Management Sciences.
Name Registration Number
Aamer Waheed CIIT/SP12-PMS-005/ISB
Supervisor
Prof. Dr. Qaisar Abbas
Director
COMSATS University Islamabad
Lahore Campus
Co-Supervisor
Dr. Omer Farooq Malik
Assistant Professor
Department of Management Sciences,
COMSATS University Islamabad
iv
Certificate of Approval
This is to certify that research work presented in this thesis, entitled “LinkingPerformance Appraisal Quality with Employee Participation in Informal LearningActivities through Psychological Empowerment” was concluded by Aamer Waheedbearing Registration No.CIIT/SP12-PMS-005/ISB, under the supervision of Prof. Dr.Qaisar Abbas. No part of this thesis has been submitted anywhere else for any otherdegree. This thesis is submitted to the Department of Management Sciences,COMSATS University Islamabad in the partial fulfillment of the requirement for thedegree of Doctor of Philosophy in the field of Management Sciences.
1. Waheed, A., Abbas, Q., & Malik, O. F. (2018). ‘Perceptions of PerformanceAppraisal Quality’ and Employee Innovative Behavior: Do PsychologicalEmpowerment and ‘Perceptions of HRM System Strength’ Matter? BehavioralSciences, 8(12), 114. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs8120114
2. Shahzad, A., Waheed, A., Khan, M. A. (2012). The Mediating Effect of IntrinsicMotivation on Perceived Investment in Employee Development and WorkPerformance, International Journal of Research in Commerce, Economics &Management, 2(5), 27-35.
3. Abbas, Q., Hameed, A., Waheed, A. (2011). Gender Discriminating & Its Effecton Employee Performance/Productivity, International Journal of Humanities andSocial Science, 1(15), 170-176.
4. Malik, O.F., Abbas, Q., Kiyani, T.M., Malik, K.U., Waheed, A. (2011). Perceivedinvestment in employee development and turnover intention: A social exchangeperspective, African Journal of Business Management, 5(5), 1904-1914.
5. Malik, O.F., Waheed, A., Malik, K.U. (2010). The Mediating Effects of JobSatisfaction on Role Stressors and Affective Commitment, International Journalof Business and Management, 5(11), 223-235.
xi
ABSTRACT
Linking Performance Appraisal Quality with Employee
Participation in Informal Learning Activities through
Psychological Empowerment
Organizations are facing increased economical, technological and labor market
challenges. In addition, they are confronted with the pressure to broaden the
employees’ participation in learning for sustainable development. Despite, manifold
efforts made towards learning in the workplace, the trends in adult learning
participation in Pakistan have remained unchanged for decades. The organizations are
relying more on formal training and learning activities whereas informal ways of
learning are not used to a large extent. The employee engagement in informal learning
activities (ILAs) is more important than formal learning because it contributes to more
than seventy percent of total learning.
The connection between human resource management practices and organizational
performance has been well established in variety of settings through employees’
participation in ILAs. There are some theoretical and methodological gaps that need
further investigation. The main research question to guide this study is how does
HRM system (content and process) impact employee participation in ILAs that
includes reflection (RE) on daily activities, knowledge sharing (KS) and innovative
behavior (IB) at the workplace. The purpose of this study is to propose a model that
explains the process in which HRM system, in terms of content (Perceptions of
performance appraisal quality) and process (perceptions of HRM system strength), is
linked to these ILAs under HR system strength (HRSS) theory.
Additionally, it is highly advised by the literature the relationship of HRM system
with organizational performance is no more recognized as a direct relationship. The
psychological empowerment (PE) as a positive job attitude plays a vital role in
shaping the behaviors of individuals in the workplace. Thus, building on the HRSS
theory, social cognitive theory and empowerment theory, the PPAQ and ILAs
relationship is better explained as mediated by PE. Moreover, it becomes imperative
xii
to examine the moderating role of PHSS in the relationship of PPAQ with employees’
attitudes (PE) and behaviors (ILAs) simultaneously.
Quantitative cross-sectional data were collected from the faculty members of twelve
public sector Higher Education Institutes/Universities (HEIs) of Islamabad Pakistan.
Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) is used for statistical
analysis of the quantitative data collected through self-administered questionnaire.
Confirmatory factor analysis was used to determine the construct validity, composite
reliability, convergent validity and discriminant validity. It appeared that the
perceptions of performance appraisal quality (PPAQ) is positively linked with PE,
RE, KS and IB. The PE is appeared to positively influence ILAs (RE, KS and IB). In
addition, PE mediates the relationship between PPAQ and these three ILAs. Further,
perceptions of HRM system strength (PHSS) as a moderator is supportive to
employees’ PE and ILAs (RE, KS and IB). The direct and interaction effect models
have small predictive relevance for all three ILAs.
The contribution of this study is manifold as it integrates the different views and
approaches into one single model to explain the mystery of ‘black box’ in HRM and
organizational performance relationship. The novel is the mediating role of PE in
explaining the relationship fetched new understandings for the researchers and
practitioners in the field of organizational behavior, organizational learning and
human resource development (HRD). In addition, the study contributes to the
literature by demonstrating that PHSS have incremental effects on employees’ PE and
ILAs. The practical implications and future directions are also discussed.
Keywords: Informal learning activities, Perceptions of performance appraisal quality,
HRM system strength, Knowledge sharing, Reflection, Innovative behavior
xiii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction ……………………………………………………... 01
1.1. Overview of the Chapter ……………………..…………. 02
1.2. Introduction of the Study ……………………..………… 02
1.3. Background of the Problem ………………..…………… 08
1.4. Problem Statement ………………………..…………….. 11
1.5. Purpose of the Study …………………………………….. 141.6. Research Questions ………………………………….….. 14
1.7. Research Objectives ………………………………….…. 15
1.8. Significance of the Study ………………………..……… 16
1.9. Thesis organization …………………….….……………. 18
1.10. Definitions of Terms ………………..………….………... 20
1.11. Summary …………………………..….…………………. 21
2. Literature Review …………………………..……….………….. 22
2.1. Introduction ……………………….……….……………. 23
2.2. Theoretical Orientation for the Study ….……..………… 23
2.3. Human Resource Management ……………….………... 24
2.3.1. Different Conceptualization of HRM ………… 25
2.3.2. Different Conceptualization of HRM Practices. 26
2.4. HRM and Organizational Performance ………………… 28
2.4.1. The Nature of Relationship …………………. 29
2.4.2. Diffeent Approaches to HRM ………………. 30
2.5. Underpinning Theories …………………………………. 33
2.5.1. Attribution Theories …………………………. 34
2.5.2. Multilevel Model Linking HR and FirmPerformance ……………………………….…. 35
xiv
2.5.3 HR System Strength Theory ……………….… 37
2.5.4 Social Cognitive Theory ……………….…….. 38
2.6. HR System Strength Theory and OrganizationalPerformance....................................................................... 39
Table 4.10: Bootstrapping Results of the indirect effect (DV = Reflection)
PPAQ PEPath ‘a’
PE REPtah ‘b’
PPAQ PERE
Path ‘ab’
Sample 0 0.557 0.161 0.090
Sample 1 0.552 0.182 0.101
Sample 2 0.449 0.201 0.090
Sample 3 0.427 0.182 0.078
Sample 4 0.453 0.240 0.109
Sample 5 0.443 0.229 0.102
Sample 6 0.443 0.280 0.124
Sample 7 0.507 0.357 0.181
Sample 8 0.561 0.216 0.121
Sample 9 0.548 0.264 0.145
Sample 10 0.436 0.257 0.112
…………. ……….. ……….. ………..
Sample 999 0.429 0.231 0.099
Note: PPAQ = Perceptions of performance appraisal quality; PE = PsychologicalEmpowerment; RE=Reflection
Table 4.11: Bootstrapping Results of the indirect effect (DV = Knowledge Sharing)
PPAQPEPath ‘a’
PE KSPtah ‘b’
PPAQ PEKS
Path ‘ab’Sample 0 0.557 0.389 0.216
Sample 1 0.552 0.241 0.133
Sample 2 0.449 0.347 0.156
Sample 3 0.427 0.348 0.148
Sample 4 0.453 0.354 0.160
164
Sample 5 0.443 0.433 0.192
Sample 6 0.443 0.330 0.146
Sample 7 0.507 0.404 0.205
Sample 8 0.561 0.464 0.260
Sample 9 0.548 0.404 0.221
Sample 10 0.436 0.406 0.177
…………. ……….. ……….. ………..
Sample 999 0.429 0.412 0.177
Note: PPAQ = Perceptions of performance appraisal quality; PE = PsychologicalEmpowerment; KS= Knowledge Sharing
Table 4.12: Bootstrapping Results of the indirect effect (DV = Innovative Behavior)
PPAQ PE
Path ‘a’
PE IB
Ptah ‘b’
PPAQ PE IB
Path ‘ab’
Sample 0 0.557 0.269 0.150
Sample 1 0.552 0.318 0.175
Sample 2 0.449 0.329 0.148
Sample 3 0.427 0.265 0.113
Sample 4 0.453 0.350 0.158
Sample 5 0.443 0.308 0.136
Sample 6 0.443 0.370 0.163
Sample 7 0.507 0.427 0.216
Sample 8 0.561 0.389 0.218
Sample 9 0.548 0.370 0.207
Sample 10 0.436 0.395 0.172
…………. ……….. ……….. ………..
Sample 999 0.429 0.304 0.130
Note: PPAQ = Perceptions of performance appraisal quality; PE = PsychologicalEmpowerment; IB=Innovative Behavior
165
4.8.3 Moderating Effect
The moderating role of PHSS in the relationship between PPAQ and PE
(H5a), RE (H5b), KS (H5c), and IB (H5d) were analyzed in next step. It was
hypothesized that perceived HRM system strength positively influence these
relationships. The higher the PHSS higher the relationship between the two constructs
and vice versa. For this purpose, interaction effects have been calculated.
Consequently, bootstrapping procedure with 1000 bootstrap samples, no sign change
option, mean replacement for missing value, 300 iterations, Bias-Corrected and
Accelerated (BCa) Bootstrap for confidence interval were used to conduct the two-
tailed significance test with 0.05 significance level. The results for moderation
analysis i.e. path coefficient, t-value and significance level are presented in Table 4.13
and Figure 4.2.
Table 4.13. Results of PLS-SEM Moderation Model
Hypothesis Hypothesis PathPath
coefficientT-value
Accept/reject
significance
H5aInteraction 4
PE0.325 2.813 Accept**
H5bInteraction 1
RE0.251 2.153 Accept*
H5c Interaction 3
KS0.235 2.162 Accept*
H5b Interaction 2
IB0.283 2.707 Accept**
Note: RE = Reflection; IB = Innovative Behavior; KS = Knowledge Sharing; PE =
Psychological Empowerment; PHSS=Perceptions of HRM System Strength;
Interaction 1 = Interaction between RE and PHSS; Interaction 2 = Interaction
between IB and PHSS; Interaction 3 = Interaction between KS and PHSS; Interaction
4 = Interaction between PE and PHSS
*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p<.001
166
Note: t-values in parenthesisDirect EffectModerating Effect
Perceptions ofPerformance
Appraisal Quality
PsychologicalEmpowerment
R2 = 0.248
ReflectionR2 = 0.274
KnowledgeSharingR2 = 0.287
InnovativeBehaviorR2 = 0.286
Perceptions ofHRM System
Strength
Age
Gender
0.349 (4.762)0.456 (6.387)
0.015 (0.281)
0.228 (3.062)
0.364 (4.233)
0.045 (1.068)
0.019 (0.422)
0.061 (1.379)
-0.031(0.657)
0.005 (0.098)
-0.002(0.053)
0.271 (3.180)
Figure 4.2: Interaction Effect Model: Perceptions of HRM System Strength as a Moderator
0.325 (2.813)
0.235 (2.162)
0.283 (2.707)
0.251 (2.153)
167
4.8.4 Interaction
The Figure 4.2 and Table 4.13 show that the effects of PPAQ on PE (β =
0.456, p value < 0.001), RE (β = 0.364, p value < 0.001), KS (β = 0.228, p value <
0.01), and IB (β = 0.271, p value < 0.01) are significant with t- value of 6.387, 4.233,
3.062 and 3.180 respectively. The interaction of PHSS and PPAQ has also significant
and positive effect on PE (β = 0.325, p value < 0.01), RE (β = 0.251, p value < 0.05),
KS (β = 0.235, p value < 0.05), and IB (β = 0.283, p value < 0.01) are significant with
t- value of 2.813, 2.153, 2.162, and 2.707 respectively. Hence the hypotheses 5a, 5b,
5c and 5d for moderating role of PHSS were accepted. If the PHSS become higher
(i.e. PHSS is increased by one standard deviation point), this would imply that the
relationship between PPAQ and PE, RE, KS and IB would increase by the size of
interaction i.e. 0.781, 0.615, 0.463 and 0.554 respectively. The same kind of
interpretation holds for situation of lower PHSS (i.e. PHSS is decreased by one
standard deviation point). Hence, the positive effect of PPAQ on PE, RE, KS and IB
were stronger when PHSS was high. Similarly, when PHSS gets higher, PPAQ
became more important for explanation PE, RE, KS and IB. To determine the nature
of moderating effects, the slopes above and below the mean of PHSS has computed to
plot the interaction. Figure 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, and 4.6 shows the moderating effects of
PPAQ on other variables.
Figure 4.3: Interaction effect of PPHS on PPAQ and PE.
11.5
22.5
33.5
44.5
5
Low Performance AppraisalQuality
High Performance AppraisalQuality
Psyc
holo
gica
l Em
pow
erm
ent
Low HRM System Strength High HRM System Strength
168
Figure 4.4: Interaction effect of PPHS on PPAQ and RE.
Figure 4.5: Interaction effect of PPHS on PPAQ and KS.
11.5
22.5
33.5
44.5
5
Low Performance AppraisalQuality
High Performance AppraisalQuality
Ref
lect
ion
on D
aily
Act
iviti
es
Low HRM System Strength High HRM System Strength
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
Low Performance AppraisalQuality
High Performance AppraisalQuality
Kno
wle
dge
Shar
ing
Low HRM System Strength High HRM System Strength
169
Figure 4.6: Interaction effect of PPHS on PPAQ and IB
4.9 Effect Size (f 2) and Predictive Relevance (q2)
The change is R2 is explored to obtain the effect size f2. It allows evaluating
the size of impact that an exogenous variable have on endogenous variable. The
R2included and R2
excluded are calculated for main effect model as well as moderating
effect model. This was done by omitting the mediating variable (PE) from main effect
model and moderating variable (PHSS) from interaction effect model. The effect size
(f 2) of 0.02, 0.15, and 0.35 represents small, medium and large effect an exogenous
variable has on endogenous variable.
Similarly, the change is Q2 is explored to obtain the predictive relevance q2.
Predictive relevance is the model’s capability to predict the effect. Blindfolding
procedures is used to determine the cross-validated measure (Q2) for mediating and
moderating variables.
We adopted the same procedure and Q2included and Q2
excluded are calculated for
main effect model as well as moderating effect model by omitting the mediating (PE)
and moderating (PHSS) variable form models respectively. The q2 value of 0.02, 0.15,
11.5
22.5
33.5
44.5
5
Low Performance AppraisalQuality
High Performance AppraisalQuality
Inno
vativ
e B
ehav
ior
Low HRM System Strength High HRM System Strength
170
and 0.35 represents small, medium and large predictive relevance of independent
variable in explaining the dependent variable (Hair et al., 2011).
4.9.1 f 2 and q2 for Main Effect Model
Firstly, the f 2 and q2 are calculated for main effect model to determine the effect size
and predictive relevance that PE have on RE, KS and IB. The values of effect size (f2) calculated for PE on RE (0.051), KS (0.150), and IB (0.113). The result shows PE
has small effect for RE and medium effects are evident for KS and IB.
Similarly, the predictive relevance (q2) value calculated for PE on RE (0.030), KS
(0.103), and IB (0.064) are all supporting. The result shows small predictive relevance
for RE and IB whereas KS has medium predictive relevance. The results for effect
size (f2) and predictive relevance (q2) are presented in Table 4.14 (RE), Table 4.15
(KS), and Table 4.16 (IB).
Table 4.14. Effect size and predictive relevance for mediating variable (DV =
Reflection)
Summary of
Results
R2
value
Q2
value
Path co-
efficient
f2 effect
size
q2 predictive
relevance
PPAQ PE
RE0.258 0.176 0.358,0.222
0.051 0.030
PB RE 0.220 0.151 0.462
Note: PPAQ = Perceptions of performance appraisal quality; PE = Psychological
Hypothesis 1There is direct, positive and significant relationship
between PPAQ and PE.Accepted
Hypothesis 2There is a direct, positive and significant relationship
between PE and RE (2a), KS (2b), and IB (2c).Accepted
Hypothesis 3There is a direct, positive and significant relationship
between PPAQ and RE (3a), KS (3b), and IB (3c).Accepted
Hypothesis 4PE mediates the relationship between PPAQ and RE
(4a), KS (4b), and IB (4c).Accepted
Hypothesis 5PHSS moderates the positive relationship between
PPAQ and PE (5a), RE (5b), KS (5c), and IB (5d).Accepted
175
4.10 Control Variables
Two demographic (control) variables, age and gender were also included in
analysis of main effect model and interaction effect model. The results of both models
show that the relationships among the control variables and outcome variables (RE,
KS and IB) were small, unsystematic and nonsignificant (all p-value <.10). All
control variables failed to predict the outcome variables.
4.11 Summary
In the current chapter the data were analyzed, and results are reported. A total
of 377 questionnaires were filled and received. After the initial test for missing
values, outliers and collinearity test, 17 cases were omitted from further analysis. The
demographics are explained in terms of frequency, mean, standard deviation,
skewness and kurtosis. Two steps approach is used to test the reflective measurement
model and structural model. In reflective measurement model the internal consistency
reliability, composite reliability measures were established to ensure that the
indicators used in study are reliable. For convergent validity, value of average
variance extracted (AVE) for all constructs was well above the threshold level. The
tests like; Hetrotrait-Monotrait (HTMT), Fornell-Larker and cross-loadings was
calculated and provided support for discriminant validity.
In next stage the main effect of structural model was examined. The results of
present study validate the quantitative finding that there is a direct and positive
relationship between PPAQ and PE, RE, KS and IB. It was also verified that PE has
direct and positive relationship with RE, KS and IB and the results were affirmative.
PE also received support from results for its mediating role in the relationship
between PPAQ and RE, KS and IB.
Further in interaction effect model, the moderating roles of PHSS was also
supported for PE, RE, KS and IB. The results of main effect model and interaction
effect model was examined in terms of their coefficient of determination (R2), path
coefficient (β), level of significance (t-value and p-value), effect size (f2) and
176
predictive relevance (q2). The results of the present study supported the study
hypothesis, and all were accepted.
In next chapter the results calculated here are discussed in more detail with
respect to objective of study, adopted methodology and literature. The discussion on
the results is much needed because the present study is of its first kind to link HRM
(content and process) with ILAs (RE, KS and IB) through PE.
177
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
178
5.1 Summary
Informal learning is an important workplace learning approach used by
workers to acquire tacit, or implicit, job knowledge and skills in the workplace
(Marsick, 2009). Informal and formal workplace modes of learning are described as
dichotomous anchors located on opposing ends of a workplace learning continuum
(Eraut, 2004, Noe, et al., 2013). Informal learning is characterized by the autonomous
actions of the learner who activates and engages workplace learning processes and
activities under terms and conditions of their choosing (Marsick & Watkins, 1990).
Reflecting on one’s actions or the actions of others, sharing knowledge and
experimenting with new techniques are examples of ILAs (Lohman, 2005; Jeon &
Kim, 2012).
Literature has identified different types of ILAs in which employees are
engaged and consensus has been found for three representative ILAs including; RE,
KS and IB (Jeong et al., 2018). Previous research demonstrated that different
individual, group and organizational level factors can inhibit or incite trigger for
individual learner to engage in ILAs (Noe et al., 2013; Cuyvers et al., 2016; Holly et
al., 2016; Hoekstra et al., 2009). The HRM in term of content (specific HR practice)
and process (HRM system) influence employees’ participation in ILAs; including RE,
KS and IB (Bednall et al., 2014). This study examined the influence of PPAQ as
content of HRM on three ILAs (RE, KS and IB) with mediating (PE) and moderating
(PHSS) variables.
A comprehensive informal learning model combining HRM content (PPAQ)
and HRM process (PHSS), are linked to three ILAs (RE, KS and IB) in which faculty
members of HEIs are engaged through PE (psychological perspective). The key
empirical findings from this study support previous research (Bednall et al., 2014) that
reported the influence of HRM on ILAs. This chapter summarizes the research,
presents findings and discussion, theoretical contribution and practical implication are
discussed.
179
5.1.1 Research Design
A correlational research design, using partial least squares, structural equation
modeling was used to analyze the data in this study. A single instrument, measuring
eleven constructs, comprised of 51 items including 7 demographic questions, was
administered personally to collect responses from the participants. The principle
research question examined the extent to which the participation in ILAs is better
explained through HRM content and process and PE. The purpose was to examine the
influence that this combination of factors promotes participation in ILAs.
The dependent variable, informal learning in this study was defined as the
activities like; RE, KS and IB activities in which employees are engaged. Independent
variable included employee PPAQ. PE and PHSS was studied as mediating and
moderating variables respectively. The RE (four-item) and KS (four-item) scales were
adapted from Van Woerkom (2003) in this study. A five-item scale was adapted from
De Jong and Den Hartog (2005) to measure IB. A three-item scale was adapted from
Bednall et al. (2014) to measure the PPAQ. A twelve-item scale was adapted from
Spreitzer (1995) to measure the PE.
The research questions in this study included:
1. Does PPAQ impact PE?
2. Does PE impact ILAs including; RE (2a), KS (2b) and IB (2c)?
3. Does PPAQ impact ILAs including; RE (3a), KS (3b) and IB (3c)?
4. Does PE mediate the relationship between PPAQ and ILAs including; RE
(4a), KS (4b) and IB (4c)?
5. Does PHSS moderate the relationship PPAQ and PE (5a) and ILAs including;
RE (5b), KS (5c) and IB (5d)?
5.1.2 Population and Sample
Pakistani higher education institutes/universities were selected for current
study. The self-administered questionnaire and data from 12 public sector
universities/institutes of Islamabad region was collected. A total of 600 questionnaires
were distributed among the faculty members of selected DAIs and 377 questionnaires
180
were filled and returned. The final response rate, after excluding the 17 responses in
preliminary analysis, was 60% (360). In a sample of 360, 59.3% participants were
male and 40.7% were female. In terms of job position the sample of faculty members
was established from 25 research associates (7%), 183 lecturers (51%), 132 assistant
professors (37%), 16 associate professors (4%) and 4 professors (1%). From
respondent’s qualification, the 211 were having master’s degree (58.6%), 102 were
holding doctoral degree (28.3) and 47 were having post-doctoral qualification
(13.1%). In term of age 53.6% are in the age bracket of 30-40 years. The tenure shows
55% are in 1-5 years and 33% are in 6-10 years of service in current organization.
5.1.3 Instrumentation
The faculty members completed a five-part questionnaire. The first part
included scales of ILAs i.e. RE, KS and IB. The second part of the questionnaire
measured PPAQ. The PE and PHSS were measured in third and fourth part of the
questionnaire. Participants responded using a five-point frequency scale, ranging from
1= “Strongly Disagree” to 5 = “Strongly Agree”. The fifth part of the questionnaire
contains the 7 items measuring demographics of the sample.
5.1.4 Scale Reliability
Scale reliability for the current study was examined by calculating the
composite reliability for each construct. The composite reliability value for PPAQ
(0.912), meaning (0.957), competence (0.951), self-determination (0.955), impact
(0.855), PE (0.965), distinctiveness (0.939), consistency (0.947), consensus (0.957),
PHSS (0.965), RE (0.921), KS (0.947) and IB (0.924) are well above the threshold
level.
5.2 Findings
This section presents research findings organized by the five principal research
questions. The overall objective of the research was to present a comprehensive
model to study the effect of HRM on ILAs. The findings are generalizable to faculty
181
members of the HEIs and other employee working in different sectors where learning
is considered obligatory.
Research Question 1: Does PPAQ impact PE?
We demonstrated that PPAQ have a direct, positive and significant
relationship with PE. This finding is consistent with previous research having same
nature of relationship between HR practices and different individual level attitudes
(Takeuchi et al., 2009) and specifically PE (Messersmith et al., 2011; Aryee et al.,
2012). HR practices psychologically empower and motivate employees (Lepak et al.,
2006; Liao et al., 2009) to effectively contribute towards organizations (Datta et al.,
2005; Ichniowski & Shaw, 1999). Performance appraisal quality does the same by
creating a sense of empowerment and self-efficacy beliefs among employees (Conger
& Kanungo, 1988). The organizations should design and implement such HR
practices that provide autonomy to employee in their work and decisions.
Research Question 2: Does PE impact ILAs including; RE (2a), KS (2b)
and IB (2c)?
First, we demonstrated that PE positively influences RE. This relationship
confirms the proposition of HR system strength theory (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004) and
social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986). The underlying premise of these theories
postulate that an individual’s behavior is the result of psychological mechanism and
psychological climate. Reflection is an intuitive mode of cognitions (Eraut, 2004). It
refers to the recognition of strength by the employee and defining the development
areas, monitoring the progress and bringing change in personal behavior to eliminate
the perceived challenges (Parsons & Stephenson, 2005). Psychologically empowered
individuals build competency in employee to affect their job by showing reflection on
their daily activities.
Second, we demonstrated that PE positively influences KS. It is proven that
PE has a positive relationship with organizational citizenship behavior that leads to
organizational performance (Messersmith et al., 2011). The results are consistent with
previous studies (Seibert et al., 2011; Ozbebek & Kilicarslan 2011; Srivastava et al.,
182
2006) and concluded that employee share the knowledge if they are psychologically
empowered. This finding is also consistent with study conducted in service business
(Ozbebek & Kilicarslan 2011) where employees frequesntly share their tacit
knowledge among colleague.
In addition, we established the link between PE and IB. This judgment
supports the premise of empowerment theory (Spreitzer, 2008) that PE plays an active
role in shaping employees’ behaviors (Choi, 2007; Yoo et al., 2017; Laschinger et al.,
2001) This result is consistent with previous research (Spretizer, 1995; Knol &
Linger, 2009; Ayoub et al., 2018). The PE influences individual behavior in
meaningful way (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990; Wang et al., 2014) and enhances
performance (Linden et al., 2000). The organizations should empower employee for
adopting new knowledge, techniques and process in their work for improvement and
innovation.
Research Question 3: Does PPAQ impact ILAs including; RE (3a), KS (3b)
and IB (3c)?
The study established the empirical link between PPAQ and ILAs including;
RE, KS and IB. These findings support the claim that HR practices plays active role
in shaping individual attitudes and behaviors (Fernandez & Moldogaziev, 2012;
Shipton et al., 2006; Brown et al., 2010). The results are consistent with previous
research (Bednall et al., 2014) by demonstrating the positive relationship between
PPAQ and ILAs including; RE, KS and IB. When employees perceive the quality in
performance appraisal they tend to be more innovative at work by adopting the new
skills, techniques and practices (Bednall et al., 2014). The supervisors should
regularly hold the performance appraisal meeting with their subordinates and openly
communicate the feedback to them will ensure quality and stimulate IL in employees.
Research Question 4: Does PE mediate the relationship between PPAQ
and ILAs including; RE (4a), KS (4b) and IB (4c)?
We also demonstrated that PE mediates the relationship between PPAQ and
ILAs; RE, KS and IB. As per our knowledge this is first of its kind to investigate the
183
mediating role of PE in underlying relationships. These results found consistency with
previous studies (Messersmith et al., 2011; Seibert et al., 2011; Phung et al., 2017;
Aryee et al., 2012) that examined the mediating role of PE in similar type of
relationship between different HR practices and employees’ behaviors.
The judgment also finds support from the assertion of Barron & Kenny (1986)
that PE can be studied as a psychological mechanism for explaining behavioral
outcomes. This shows that the individual task is important with respect to its impact
on other employees and organization. They feel themselves competent for assigned
tasks and empowered to make decisions. The employees take active part in innovation
by depicting IB when they are psychologically empowered through the quality of
performance appraisal and feedback process.
Research Question 5: Does PHSS moderate the relationship PPAQ and PE
(5a) and ILAs including; RE (5b), KS (5c) and IB (5d)?
Furthermore, the study established the moderating role of PHSS. First, we
demonstrated that PHSS strengthening the relationship between PPAQ and PE. As per
our understanding and knowledge this study is first of its type to empirically
investigate such affect. The only theoretical support is the multilevel framework of
Ostroff and Bowen (2000) in which they posed that strength of HR system can be the
moderator on psychological climate at individual level. Second, we also demonstrated
that the relationships between PPAQ and ILAs including; RE, KS and IB are
strengthened by PHSS. This is consistent with previous research (Bednall et al.,
2014). The results find an incremental effect of PHSS on PE and ILAs.
5.3 Discussion
A detailed discussion is provided on the main objective of this research under
this Section. The main objective of this research was to propose a comprehensive
model linking HRM with performance. The missing links are known as ‘black box’ in
the literature. To understand the relationship between HRM and performance the
theory about HRM and performance is first summarized in literature review. The links
between HRM and performance has created by taking the proxies i.e. PPAQ and
184
PHSS as an abstract level HRM and ILAs (RE, KS and IB) as the performance
indicators (Bednall et al., 2014; Aguinis & Kraiger, 2009). This Section also provides
the in-depth discussion on the mediating role of PE and the moderating role of PHSS
in strengthening the relationship. This is in reply to Guest (1997) call for theory
refinement.
The area of HRM has researched from different perspectives which generated
different theoretical debates. The literature shows that the best-fit and best-practice
approaches have their advantages and disadvantages. The best-fit approach has the
advantage of internal and external fit which is considered as a source of competitive
advantage. However, there is a lack of consensus among the researcher on the
practices that constitutes HRM system under best-fit approach. Additionally, this
approach lacks in its empirical validation as well (Wright & Gardner, 2000).
Conversely, the best-practice approach is supported by empirical research and
proposes that a set of HRM practices produce the same results regardless of other
factors i.e. context (Pfeffer, 1994). The best-practice approach also criticized for
having the same effect on different organizational performance. The both best-fit and
best-practice approaches have disadvantages and lack the consensus among
researcher. This created the space for third theoretical approach in conceptualizing
HRM. The abstract-level HRM is proposed by Becker and Gerhart (1996). Under this
approach the HR practices are classified into four main groups (Boselie et al., 2015).
The abstract-level HRM eliminates the differences between the other two approaches.
So, the current study was designed to research the HRM at abstract level rather than
best-fit or best-practice.
Additionally, the other debate in HRM literature is to study the individual
HRM practices or study the system of HRM. The individual HRM practices were the
focus of research in 1990 (e.g. Gerhart & Milkovich, 1990) which was later
challenged for its validity (Katou, 2012). The main argument developed was that the
individual HRM practice cannot operate is isolation. It is suggested that these
practices operate in combination or interaction with other practices. Employees
experience the different HR practice at same time. The more value is given to synergy
between these two approaches.
185
Moreover, the direct relationship between HRM and organizational
performance is criticized by many studies due to the ignorance of other contributing
variable (Wright & Gardner, 2000). The more clarity is needed to better understand
the HRM and performance relationship. The ‘black box’ issues are dealt through the
inclusion of possible intervening variables (mediating and moderating). In addition,
the more emphasis has been placed on the study of proximal variables or individual
level outcomes that affects the distal variable or organizational level outcomes
(Paauwe, 2009). These proximal variables are employees’ attitudes and behaviors. It
was found that the PE is more suitable positive attitude that studied as a mediating
variable.
Furthermore, the study of HRM performance relationship through the content
of HRM and mediating link is only half the solution to ‘black box’ mystery. The
process approach of HRM system is equally important. There are different
conceptualizations of HRM system strength in the literature. Under the process
approach the HRM system and its implementation plays a vital role in shaping the
human attitudes and behavior which ultimately leads to organizational performance
(Bednall et al., 2014; Bowen & Ostroff, 2004). The literature suggests that a well-
designed HRM system cannot produce the desired results if it is poorly implemented.
The employees’ perceptions of an HRM system in terms of its distinctiveness,
consistency and consensus are crucial. The system sends signals to employee about
the expected behaviors.
This study provides the empirical evidences on how abstract level HRM in
terms of content and process affect ILAs. The results of this study are important for
several reasons. First, the results indicated a statistically significant relationship
among PPAQ and ILAs including; RE, KS and IB. This supports that ILAs are
influenced by organizational level contextual factors like PPAQ. This is in reply to
Bednall et al. (2014) for replicating the study in another context. Contextual factors
have been previously predicted to influence employees’ informal learning
engagement either positively or negatively (Ellinger, 2005).
Second, results indicate that PE is positively correlated to ILAs including RE,
KS and IB. These findings are important and extend our general understanding of how
186
HRM in terms of content and process influence informal workplace learning. In
addition, this is in line with the Dyer and Reeves (1995) suggestion that an HRM
system affect the organizational performance after affecting the proximal variables.
Unlike previous studies the current research is focused on only PE as the most
suitable under HRSS theory for HRM-organizational performance linkages (Bowen &
Ostroff, 2004).
Lastly, results indicate that PHSS moderates the positive relationship of HRM
with PE and ILAs including; RE, KS and IB. This also addresses the issue of
integrating content and process approaches for better understanding of the HRM-
performance relationship. The employees’ perception of HRM system in terms of its
distinctiveness in presence, consistency in messages and consensus among the policy
maker, creates a strong climate. There was a main question that how strong HRM
system influences employees’ attitude and behaviors is addressed. It shows that HRM
system strength psychologically empower employees to display the required
behaviors i.e. ILAs for better performance (individual and organizational level).
The findings of this study account for 25, 27 and 26 percent variance in RE,
KS, and IB is explained by the relationship along with 22 percent variance is
explained by PPAQ in direct effect model. In interaction effect model the variance
reached to 27, 28, 28 and 24 percent for RE, KS, IB and PE respectively. These
results are concurrent with previous studies (e.g. Bednall et al., 2014; Messersmith et
al., 2011). Faculty members of HEIs are engage in ILAs to solve personal learning
needs while at work. The findings of this study confirm that organizational contextual
factors like PPAQ and PHSS interact with employee attitudes and behavior as
proposed by Bowen & Ostroff (2004).
The work conditions, social-relational and hierarchical are the contextual
factors that are related to informal and incidental learning process (Marsick &
Watkins, 1990). In addition, the findings also support the assertion of HR system
strength theory (Bowen & Ostroff, 2004) for psychological factors influencing
attitudes and behavior. PE as an antecedent of ILAs has positive impact. The findings
of the study also specify the causal relationship of HR system strength theory that
187
HRM (content and process) do not directly influence the ILAs rather through the
psychological climate by psychologically empowering employee.
Among the examined variables, the predictive relationship of perceptions of
ILAs and PE was found to be statistically significant. This finding suggests that ILAs
like RE, KS and IB are influenced by psychological factors within organizational
context. This finding is consistent with relevant studies examining the relationships
between informal learning processes and organizational factors (Jeon & Kim, 2012;
Hoekstra et al., 2011; Doornbos, et al., 2008; Ellinger, 2005). The results of this study
also support previous research findings on informal learning for teachers (Lohman,
2005), public sector managers and supervisors (Cunningham & Hillier, 2013), HRD
professionals (Lohman, 2009), nurses (Bjørk et al., 2013) and police officers
(Doornbos et al., 2008).
Faculty members have asked to report their participation in three ILAs i.e. RE,
KS and IB. They reveal equal preference towards these activities. ILAs found equally
important for the profession of teaching and preferred collaborating with others
directly (Doornbos, et al., 2008). These three ILAs were adapted from the work of
Bednall et al. (2014) and were empirically validated for teachers in vocational training
schools. The faculty members operate independently in the classroom and it allows
more flexibility in term of time and choosing an informal learning path. Their role is
based on social interaction so there is no surprise of their engagement in ILAs.
5.4 Theoretical contributions
The study intends to examine the employee participation of ILAs from the
perspective of HR system strength theory and a conceptual model was developed. The
study succeeded in determining the relationships under HR system strength theory
which suggests that the employee attitudes and behavior are not directly shaped by the
HR practices. The role of HRM system strength and the role of psychological climate
are critical as they trigger such attitudes and behaviors. The study confirmed the
positive influence of PPAQ in determining employee participation in RE, KS and IB.
This study thus responds to the call of Bednall et al. (2014) for replicating the study in
another context and setting.
188
The current study makes several theoretical contributions. First, the study is
succeeded in establishing the theoretical and empirical link between HRM and
performance specifically, the content of HRM (i.e. PPAQ) and the process of HRM
(i.e. PHSS). The effect of psychological perspective i.e. PE is also established.
Previous studies (Aryee et al., 2012; Messersmith et al., 2011) studied the relationship
of HR practices and different employees’ attitudes and behavior. These studies were
conducted by taking the bundle or set of HR practices in which the impact of
individual practice cannot be determined. Performance appraisal was studied as a prat
of HR system. The other (e.g., Carless, 2004) studied performance appraisal in
combination or in isolation as a whole system where no distinction has been made
between different elements of performance appraisal like; satisfaction with
performance appraisal, accuracy in performance appraisal, reactions to performance
appraisal, effectiveness of performance appraisal and quality of performance
appraisal. The current study contributed in the literature by establishing the theoretical
and empirical link of employees’ PPAQ with PE which was focused less in literature.
In addition to this the current study succeeded in examining the mediating role
of PE in relationship between PPAQ (HRM) and ILAs (Performance) including; RE,
Ks and IB. To the best of our knowledge the relationship between PPAQ and PE is
emerging in literature but studies (Bednall et al., 2014) have been conducted on the
relationship between PPAQ and ILAs (RE, KS and IB). The mediating role of PE
underlying these relationships brings new insight by making additions in the
literature. The empowered employees participate in ILAs (RE, KS and IB). The
quality of performance appraisal plays an active role in promoting employees feeling
of PE at work.
Lastly, this study also contributed in theory by establishing the intervening
role of PHSS in relationship with PE. The moderating role of PHSS for ILAs (RE, KS
and IB) is evident (Bednall et al., 2014). The current study established the moderating
role of PHSS in relationship between PPAQ and PE. As per researcher knowledge this
study is the first of its kind to establish such relationship. The PHSS play active role
in empowering employee and consequently stimulating desired behaviors. This stems
189
the new directions of research in organizational behavior, HRM, HR practices and
performance appraisal.
5.5 Practical Implications
The results of the study also have some practical implications for multiple
stakeholders including, employees, managers, policy makers and researchers. The
employees’ participation in ILAs is imperative for sustainability of organizations. The
study is conducted in educational context and the faculty members are involved in
teaching and research.
First the positive affect of PPAQ on ILAs (RE, KS and IB) directly and
indirectly through PE calls for special attention. Given that PPAQ facilitate employee
in RE on daily activities, encourage KS and promote IB among faculty members,
organizations should develop such appraisal practices that ensure quality. It implies
that open communication policy must prevail and ensured through feedback.
The supervisor/head of the department is held responsible for improvement in
teaching and research. The performance appraisal needs to be supportive for
employee and it gives voice to the problems faced by the faculty members rather
practicing it as a monitoring mechanism. The supervisors are required to regularly
highlight the areas for improvement and change. This will change the employees’
perceptions of their performance appraisal and they consider quality in that. The
quality of performance appraisal implies that employee will respond positively by
adapting and engaging themselves in learning informally.
Secondly the HEIs and other organization need to psychologically empower
their employee in their work. It implies that they are empowered to bring innovation
in teaching and practice by adopting the new methods, techniques and technology;
sharing knowledge among colleagues and through reflection on their daily activities.
It will ultimately lead to better performance of faculty members in term of teaching
and research. RE, KS and IB in teaching generate new ideas and insights which
improve the performance of students and finally organizational performance is
improved.
190
Thirdly, the higher authorities or policy makers should device policies to
promote ILAs. The organization should provide assistance to employee with respect
to technological change. Training and continuous learning must be the focus of
policies in the field of education. The faculty members should be empowered to bring
positive change in their work, and organizations must recognize and reward them. It
will affect the performance of colleagues, groups and unit as well.
Lastly, the policies should be same at all levels or organizational hierarchy.
Especially with respect to HR policy the HRM system should send distinct and
consistent messages to employees. It will eradicate the biasness and favoritism. The
consensus regarding HR policies should be present at all levels of organization.
5.6 Limitations and Future Directions
The current studies carried out by having some limitations that offer
opportunities for future research. Firstly, the propose model and the results of the
study implies positive assertions however, it implied the cross-sectional design. The
longitudinal design will help to understand the changes in behavior over time can be
of interest. We followed the explanatory approach whereas mixed methods especially
sequential explanatory design in future is recommended to strengthen the current
findings.
Secondly, in current study the RE, KS and IB were assessed as unidimensional
construct. The exploration of different dimensions of these behaviors is interesting for
future research. It is suggested that the separate assessment for creation, promotion
and implementation of new idea should be made in future research. Similarly, current
study is only focused on single element of performance appraisal i.e. PPAQ. The
future study including other elements and HR practices in the model can be fruitful
for determining the role of HRM in ILAs.
Thirdly, we demonstrated preliminary investigation in which psychologically
empowerment partially mediates the relationship between PPAQ and ILAs. There is a
possibility of other factors that also mediate the relationship between the studied
constructs. The study focusing other behavioral/cognitive factors would be interesting
191
for future research like; job satisfaction, organizational commitment and turnover
intention. Similarly, the role of other moderating variables like organizational culture
and structural empowerment can be explored in future studies.
Lastly, the current study was conducted in a specific sector and the data was
collected from the specific group. The sample was the faculty members working in
twelve public sector universities of Islamabad, Pakistan. The same was not
highlighted in the title of this dissertation and we are unable to entertain the
suggestions of foreign examiner due to certain administrative constraints.
Additionally, trusting on one sector with similar firms/institutes/universities calls the
generalizability into question. The replication in future is invited to test the robustness
of the current model on different samples by involving more sectors and industries.
The future studies to undertake the comparative studies among public and private
sectors institutions/universities might be fruitful, as there might be different
orientation exists for ILAs.
5.7 Concluding Remarks
There are a countless number of opportunities for an employee to learn in the
workplace. Beyond the formal training that organizations provide to their employees
there are ILAs that can give an employee the chance to gain valuable knowledge. It is
an important means of acquiring tacit knowledge by the faculty members. ILAs can
be independent or collaborative, and include activities like; RE, KS and IB. Scholars
generally agree that worker dependence on self-directed and autonomous learning
may not occur without the support from HRM system (content and process) within the
organization. The administrators and HR professional must ensure that their
supervisors understand their impact on the informal learning practices of their
employees.
The focus of this study was based on a conceptual framework developed by
Bowen & Ostroff (2004) and Ostroff and Bowen (2000). The current study
empirically demonstrated that the PPAQ have positive impact on employee
participation in ILAs including; RE, KS and IB in educational context. The feedback
and performance appraisal influences faculty members’ participation in ILAs. The
192
feedbacks encourage the teaching staff to take initiative and place value on knowledge
and skills acquisition. The PPAQ create supportive learning climate in which faculty
members are engaged in ILAs.
These relationships between PPAQ and ILAs are mediated by PE. The
combination of socio-cultural and psychological factors is useful in predicting
participation in ILAs. The psychological climates where employees are empowered to
take decisions at their own facilitate participation.
Further we found that the PHSS moderate the relationship between PPAQ and;
PE, RE, KS and IB. The institutes/universities and supervisor/manager of different
department are advised to stimulate ILAs by bringing quality in performance
appraisal and by empowering employees. It implies that the HEIs should development
such policies and practices that forester RE, KS and IB. It is meant compulsory for
organizational growth, development and sustainability. This will lead to improved
performance at individual, unit and organizational level.
193
REFERENCES
194
Aalbers, R., Dolfsma, W., & Koppius, O. (2014). Rich Ties and Innovative Knowledge Transfer withina Firm. British Journal of Management, 25(4), 833-848.
Abzari, M., Labbaf, H., Atafar, A., Talebi, H., Moazami, M., & Teimouri, H. (2011). Comparativeanalysis of challenges of organizational culture scope in two private and public sectors of Iran’spetrochemical industry and its impact on effectiveness of human resource managementpractices’. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(3), 1480-1490.
Adnan, Z., Abdullah, H. S., & Ahmad, J. (2011). Direct influence of human resource managementpractices on financial performance in Malaysian R&D companies. World Review of BusinessResearch, 1(3), 61-77.
Aguinis, H., & Kraiger, K. (2009). Benefits of Training and Development for Individuals and Teams,Organizations, and Society. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 451–474.
Aguinis, H., & Pierce, C. A. (2008). Enhancing the relevance of organizational behavior by embracingperformance management research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(1), 139–145.
Ahmad, S., & Schroeder, R. G. (2003). The impact of human resource management practices onoperational performance: recognizing country and industry differences. Journal of operationsManagement, 21(1), 19-43.
Ahmed, A., Hussain, I., Ahmed, S., & Akbar, M. F. (2010). Performance appraisals impact onattitudinal outcomes and organisational performance. International Journal of Business andManagement, 5(10), 62.
Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior.
Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Knowledge management and knowledge management systems:Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107-136.
Alola, U., Avci, T., & Ozturen, A. (2018). Organization Sustainability through Human ResourceCapital: The Impacts of Supervisor Incivility and Self-Efficacy. Sustainability, 10(8), 2610.
Amabile, T. M. (1988). A Model of Creativity and Innovation in Organizations. Research inOrganizational Behavior, 10(1), 123-167.
Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity in Context: Update to the Social Psychology of Creativity. HachetteUK.
Amenumey, E. K., & Lockwood, A. (2008). Psychological climate and psychological empowerment:an exploration in a luxury UK hotel group. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 8(4), 265-281.
Anderson, D., Lucas, K. B., & Ginns, I. S. (2003). Theoretical Perspectives on Learning in an InformalSetting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 177-199.
Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge Transfer: A Basis for Competitive Advantage in Firms.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 82(1), 150-169.
Argote, L., McEvily, B., & Reagans, R. (2003). Introduction to the special issue on managingknowledge in organizations: Creating, retaining, and transferring knowledge. ManagementScience, 49(4), v-viii.
Argyris, C. (1957A). Personality and organization; the conflict between system and the individual.
Argyris, C. (1957B). The individual and organization: Some problems of mutualadjustment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1-24.
195
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1978). Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Approach. Reading,MA: Addision Wesley.
Ariyani, N., & Hidayati, S. (2018). Influence of Transformational Leadership and Work Engagementon Innovative Behaviour. Etikonomi, 17(2), 275-284.
Aryee, S., Walumbwa, F. O., Seidu, E. Y. M., & Otaye, L. E. (2012). Impact of High-PerformanceWork Systems on Individual- and Branch Level Performance: Test of a Multilevel Model ofIntermediate Linkages. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97(2), 287-300.
Ashforth, B. E. (1989). The Experience of Powerlessness in Organizations. Organizational Behaviorand Human Decision Processes, 43(2), 207-242.
Axtell, C. M., Holman, D. J., Unsworth, K. L., Wall, T. D., & Waterson, P. E. (2000). Shop FloorInnovation: Facilitating the Suggestion and Implementation of Ideas. Journal of Occupationaland Organizational Psychology, 73, 265–285.
Ayoub, D., Al-Akhras, D., Na’anah, G., & Al-Madadha, A. (2018). The Relationship BetweenPsychological Empowerment and Creative Performance of Employees: Mediating Effect of JobSatisfaction in International Non-Governmental Organizations European Scientific Journal,14(20), 217-239.
Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models. Journal of theAcademy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74-94.
Bakkenes, I., Vermunt, J. D., & Wubbels, T. (2010). Teacher Learning in the Context of EducationalInnovation: Learning Activities and Learning Outcomes of Experienced Teachers. Learning andInstruction, 20, 533-548.
Balkar, B. (2015). The Relationships between Organizational Climate, Innovative Behavior and JobPerformance of Teachers. International online Journal of Educational Sciences, 7(2).
Baluch, A. M. (2017). Employee perceptions of HRM and well-being in nonprofit organizations:unpacking the unintended. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(14),1912-1937.
Bandura, A. (1974). Behavior Theory and the Models of Man. American psychologist, 29(12), 859.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986.
Bandura, A. (1989). Regulation of Cognitive Processes through Perceived Self-efficacy. Developmental Psychology, 25(5), 729.
Bandura, A. (1991). Social Cognitive Theory of Self-regulation. Organizational Behavior and HumanDecision Processes, 50(2), 248-287.
Bandura, A. (1992). Exercise of Personal Agency through the Self-efficacy Mechanism. Self-efficacy:Thought Control of Action, 1, 3-37.
Bandura, A. (1999). Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentic Perspective. Asian Journal of SocialPsychology, 2(1), 21-41.
Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (2001). Self‐efficacy Beliefs as Shapersof Children's Aspirations and Career Trajectories. Child Development, 72(1), 187-206.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management,17(1), 99-120.
196
Barney, J. B., & Wright, P. M. (1998). On Becoming a Strategic Partner: The Role of HumanResources in Gaining Competitive Advantage. Human Resource Management, 37(1), 31-46.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The Moderator–Mediator Variable Distinction in SocialPsychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173.
Bartel, A. P. (1994). Productivity Gains from the Implementation of Employee TrainingPrograms. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 33(4), 411-425.
Bartel, A. P. (2004). Human Resource Management and Organizational Performance: Evidence fromRetail Banking. Industrial and Labor Relation Review, 57(2), 181-203.
Batt, R. (2002). Managing Customer Services: Human Resource Practices, Quit Rates, and SalesGrowth. Academy of Management Journal, 45(3), 587-597.
Becker, B. E., & Huselid, M. A. (2006). Strategic Human Resources Management: Where do We gofrom Here?. Journal of Management, 32(6), 898-925.
Becker, B. E., Huselid, M. A., Pickus, P. S., & Spratt, M. F. (1997). HR as a Source of ShareholderValue: Research and Recommendations. Human Resource Management: Published inCooperation with the School of Business Administration, The University of Michigan and inalliance with the Society of Human Resources Management, 36(1), 39-47.
Becker, B., & Gerhart, B. (1996). The Impact of Human Resource Management on OrganizationalPerformance: Progress and Prospects. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 779-801.
Beckett, D., & Hager, P. (2005). Life, Work and Learning. Routledge.
Bednall, T. C., & Sanders, K. (2017). Do Opportunities for Formal Learning Stimulate Follow‐UpParticipation in Informal Learning? A Three‐Wave Study. Human ResourceManagement, 56(5), 803-820.
Bednall, T. C., Sanders, K., & Runhaar, P. (2014). Stimulating Informal Learning Activities throughPerceptions of Performance Appraisal Quality and Human Resource Management SystemStrength: A Two-Wave Study. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 13(1), 45-61.
Bekele, A. Z., Shigutu, A. D., & Tensay, A. T. (2014). The Effect of Employees’ Perception ofPerformance Appraisal on their Work Outcomes. International Journal of Management andCommerce Innovations, 2(1), 136-173.
Bell, S. T., & Arthur Jr, W. (2008). Feedback acceptance in developmental assessment centers: the roleof feedback message, participant personality, and affective response to the feedbacksession. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(5), 681-703.
Benkhoff, B. (1997). A test of the HRM model: Good for employers and employees. Human ResourceManagement Journal, 7(4), 44-60.
Bennett, E. E. (2012). A four-part model of informal learning: Extending Schugurensky's conceptualmodel. Adult Education Research Conference Proceedings (Saratoga Springs, NY).
Berg, S. A., & Chyung, S. Y. Y. (2008). Factors that influence informal learning in the workplace.Journal of Workplace Learning, 20(4), 229-244.
Bhatnagar, J. (2012). Management of innovation: role of psychological empowerment, workengagement and turnover intention in the Indian context. The International Journal of HumanResource Management, 23(5), 928-951.
197
Blau, P. M. (1968). Social exchange. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, 7, 452-457.
Bloom, N., & Van Reenen, J. (2010). Why do Management Practices Differ Across Firms andCountries?. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 24(1), 203-24.
Bogler, R., & Somech, A. (2004). Influence of Teacher Empowerment on Teachers’ OrganizationalCommitment, Professional Commitment and Organizational Citizenship Behavior inSchools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(3), 277-289.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). A New Incremental Fit Index for General Structural EquationModels. Sociological Methods & Research, 17(3), 303-316.
Bolton, G. (2014). Reflective practice: Writing and Professional Development. (4th edn). London, SagePublications.
Bonias, D., Bartram, T., Leggat, S. G., & Stanton, P. (2010). Does Psychological EmpowermentMediate the Relationship Between High Performance Work Systems and Patient Care Quality inHospitals? Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 48(3), 319-337.
Boselie, P., Dietz, G., & Boon, C. (2005). Commonalities and Contradictions in HRM and PerformanceResearch. Human Resource Management Journal, 15(3), 67-94.
Bos-Nehles, A. (2010). The line makes the difference: Line managers as effective HRpartners. Zutphen, The Netherlands: CPI Wöhrmann Print Service.
Boswell, W. R., & Boudreau, J. W. (2002). Separating the Developmental and Evaluative PerformanceAppraisal Uses. Journal of Business and Psychology, 16(3), 391-412.
Bowen, D. E., & Lawler III, E. E. (1992). The Empowerment of Service Workers: What, Why, How,and When. MIT Sloan Management Review, 33(3), 31.
Bowen, D. E., & Lawler III, E. E. (1995). Empowering Service Employees. MIT Sloan ManagementReview, 36(4), 73-85.
Bowen, D. E., & Ostroff, C. (2004). Understanding HRM–Firm Performance Linkages: The Role ofthe “Strength” of The HRM System. Academy of Management Review, 29(2), 203-221.
Boxall, P., & Macky, K. (2007). High‐performance work systems and organisational performance:Bridging theory and practice. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 45(3), 261-270.
Boxall, P., & Macky, K. (2009). Research and theory on high-performance work systems: progressingthe high involvement stream. Human Resource Management Journal, 19(1), pp. 03-23.
Boxall, P., & Purcell, J. (2008). Strategy and Human Resource Management (2nd Edition). New York:Palgrave MacMillan.
Boxall, P., Ang, S. H., & Bartram, T. (2011). Analysing the ‘black box’ of HRM: Uncovering HRgoals, mediators, and outcomes in a standardized service environment. Journal of ManagementStudies, 48(7), 1504-1532.
Boxall, P., Macky, K., & Rasmussen, E. (2003). Labour turnover and retention in New Zealand: Thecauses and consequences of leaving and staying with employers. Asia Pacific Journal of HumanResources, 41(2), 196-214.
Brown, M., Hyatt, D., & Benson, J. (2010). Consequences of the Performance Appraisal Experience.Personnel Review, 39(3), 375-396.
198
Bryman, A. (2012). Sampling in Qualitative Research. Social Research Methods, 4, 415-429.
Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2011). Ethics in Business Research. Business Research Methods.
Bukowitz, W. R., & Williams, R. L. (1999). Looking Though the Knowledge Glass. CIO-FRAMINGHAM MA-, 13, 76-85.
Burns & Grove (1993) The Practice of Nursing Research, 2nd Edition, Philadelphia: Saunders.
Burns, M. K., & VanDerHeyden, A. M. (2006). Using response to intervention to assess learningdisabilities: Introduction to the special series. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32(1), 3-5.
Butts, M. M., Casper, W. J., & Wang, T. S. (2013). How important are work–family support policies?A meta-analytic investigation of their effects on employee outcomes. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 98(1), 1-25.
Cabrera, E. F., & Cabrera, A. (2005). Fostering knowledge sharing through people managementpractices. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(5), 720-735.
Campbell, D. J., & Campbell, K. M. (2001). Why individuals voluntarily leave: perceptions of humanresource managers versus employees. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 39(1), 23-41.
Candy, P. C. (1989). Alternative paradigms in educational research. The Australian EducationalResearcher, 16(3), 1-11.
Carless, S. A. (2004). Does psychological empowerment mediate the relationship betweenpsychological climate and job satisfaction?. Journal of Business and Psychology, 18(4), 405-425.
Cavana, R. Y., Delahaye, B. L., & Sekaran, U. (2001). Applied business research: Qualitative andquantitative methods. John Wiley & Sons, Australia.
Cennamo, L., & Gardner, D. (2008). Generational differences in work values, outcomes and person-organisation values fit. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(8), 891-906.
Cerasoli, C. P., Alliger, G. M., Donsbach, J. S., Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Orvis, K. A.(2018). Antecedents and outcomes of informal learning behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal ofBusiness and Psychology, 33(2), 203-230.
Cerasoli, C. P., Alliger, G. M., Donsbach, J. S., Mathieu, J. E., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Orvis, K. A.(2017). Antecedents and Outcomes of Informal Learning Behaviors: A Meta-Analysis. Journalof Business Psychology.
Cesário, F., & Chambel, M. J. (2017). Linking organizational commitment and work engagement toemployee performance. Knowledge and Process Management, 24(2), 152-158.
Chan, D. C., & Austerb, E. (2003). Factors contributing to the professional development of referencelibrarians. Library & Information Science Research, 25(3), 265-286.
Chaudary, I. A., & Imran, S. (2012). Listening to Unheard Voices: Professional Development Reformsfor Pakistani Tertiary Teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(2), 88-98.
Chen, D., & Wang, Z. (2014). The effects of human resource attributions on employee outcomesduring organizational change. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 42(9),1431-1443.
199
Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. Modernmethods for business research, 295(2), 295-336.
Chin, W. W. (2010A). Bootstrap cross-validation indices for PLS path model assessment. In Handbookof partial least squares (pp. 83-97). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Chin, W. W. (2010B). How to write up and report PLS analyses. In Handbook of partial least squares(pp. 655-690). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Chini, T. (2004). Effective knowledge transfer in multinational corporations. Springer.
Choi, J. N. (2007). Change‐oriented organizational citizenship behavior: effects of work environmentcharacteristics and intervening psychological processes. Journal of Organizational Behavior,28(4), 467-484.
Choi, W., & Jacobs, R. L. (2011). Influences of Formal Learning, Personal Learning Orientation, andSupportive Learning Environment on Informal Learning. Human Resource DevelopmentQuarterly, 22(3), 239-257.
Chow, W. S., & Chan, L. S. (2008). Social network, social trust and shared goals in organizationalknowledge sharing. Information & Management, 45(7), 458–465.
Chuang, C. H., & Liao, H. U. I. (2010). Strategic human resource management in service context:Taking care of business by taking care of employees and customers. PersonnelPsychology, 63(1), 153-196.
Clarke, N. (2004). HRD and the challenges of assessing learning in the workplace. InternationalJournal of Training and Development, 8(2), 140-156.
Clus, M. A. L. (2011). Informal learning in the workplace: A review of the literature. AustralianJournal of Adult Learning, 51(2), 355-373.
Cohen, J. (1992). A Power Primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155.
Colley, H., Hodkinson, P., & Malcolm, J. (2002). Non-Formal Learning: Mapping the ConceptualTerrain. A Consultation Report, 387-415.
Colvin, A. J., & Boswell, W. R. (2007). The problem of action and interest alignment: Beyond jobrequirements and incentive compensation. Human Resource Management Review, 17(1), 38-51.
Combs, J., Liu, Y., Hall, A., & Ketchen, D. (2006). How much do high‐performance work practicesmatter? A meta‐analysis of their effects on organizational performance. PersonnelPsychology, 59(3), 501-528.
CONGER, J. A., & KANUNGO, R. N. (1988). The Empowerment Process: Integrating Theory andPractice. Academy of Management Review, 13(3), 471-482.
Cooper, D. R., & Emory, C. W. (1995). Business Research Methods, USA: Richard D. Irwin.
Cormier-MacBurnie, P., Doyle, W., Mombourquette, P., & Young, J. D. (2015). Canadian Chefs’Workplace Learning. European Journal of Training and Development, 39(6), 522-537.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions.
Crick, R. D., Haigney, D., Huang, S., Coburn, T., & Goldspink, C. (2013). Learning power in theworkplace: the effective lifelong learning inventory and its reliability and validity and
200
implications for learning and development. The International Journal of Human ResourceManagement, 24(11), 2255-2272.
Cross, J. (2011). Informal learning: Rediscovering the natural pathways that inspire innovation andperformance. John Wiley & Sons.
Crouse, P., Doyle, W., & Young, J. D. (2011). Workplace learning strategies, barriers, facilitators andoutcomes: a qualitative study among human resource management practitioners. HumanResource Development International, 14(1), 39-55.
Crouse, P., Doyle, W., & Young, J. D. (2011). Workplace learning strategies, barriers, facilitators andoutcomes: a qualitative study among human resource management practitioners. HumanResource Development International, 14(1), 39-55.
Cseh, M. Managerial Learning in the Transition to a Free Market Economy in Romanian PrivateCompanies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Georgia, Athens, 1998.
Cseh, M., Watkins, K. E., & Marsick, V. J. (1999). Informal and incidental learning in the work-place.In G. A. Straka (Ed.), Conceptions of self-directed learning: Theoretical and conceptualconsiderations (pp. 59–74). MuNster, Germany: Waxman.
Cunningham, J., & Hillier, E. (2013). Informal Learning in The Workplace: Key Activities andProcesses. Education+ Training, 55(1), 37-51.
Cuyvers, K., Donche, V., & Van den Bossche, P. (2016). Learning beyond graduation: exploring newlyqualified specialists’ entrance into daily practice from a learning perspective. Advances inHealth Sciences Education, 21(2), 439-453.
Daileyl, R. C., & Kirk, D. J. (1992). Distributive and procedural justice as antecedents of jobdissatisfaction and intent to turnover. Human Relations, 45(3), 305-317.
Darehzereshki, M. (2013). Effects of Performance Appraisal Quality on Job Satisfaction inMultinational Companies in Malaysia. International Journal of Enterprise Computing andBusiness Systems, 2(1).
Datta, D. K., Guthrie, J. P., & Wright, P. M. (2005). Human Resource Management and LaborProductivity: Does Industry Matter? Academy of Management Journal, 48(1), pp. 135–145.
Davenport, T. H., & Prusak, L. (1998). Working knowledge: How organizations manage what theyknow. Harvard Business Press.
De Jong, J. P. J., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2005). Determinanten van innovatief gedrag: een onderzoekonder kenniswerkers in het MKB. Gedrag & Organisatie, 18(5), 235-259.
De Jong, J., & Den Hartog, D. (2010). Measuring Innovative Work Behaviour. Creativity andInnovation Management, 19(1), 23-36.
De Winne, S., Delmotte, J., Gilbert, C., & Sels, L. (2013). Comparing and explaining HR departmenteffectiveness assessments: Evidence from line managers and trade union representatives. TheInternational Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(8), 1708-1735.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
Dee, J. R., Henkin, A. B., & Duemer, L. (2003). Structural antecedents and psychological correlates ofteacher empowerment. Journal of Educational Administration, 41(3), 257-277.
201
Deepa, M. E., Palaniswamy, D. R., & Kuppusamy, D. S. (2014). Effect of Performance AppraisalSystem in Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction and Productivity. ContemporaryManagement Research, 8(1), 72 - 82.
Delery, J. E., & Doty, D. H. (1996). Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management:Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions. Academy ofmanagement Journal, 39(4), 802-835.
Delery, J. E., & Doty, D. H. (1996). Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management:Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions. Academy ofManagement Journal, 39(4), 802-835.
Delery, J. E., & Shaw, J. D. (2001). The strategic management of people in work organizations:Review, synthesis, and extension. In Research in Personnel and Human ResourcesManagement (pp. 165-197). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Delmotte, J., Winne, S. D., & Sels, L. (2012). Toward an assessment of perceived HRM systemstrength: scale development and validation. The International Journal of Human ResourceManagement, 23(7), 1481-1506.
Denisi, A. S., & Griffin, R. W. (2005). HRM: An Introduction. Cengage Learning India PrivateLimited, New Delhi, 246.
DeNisi, A. S., & Pritchard, R. D. (2006). Performance Appraisal, Performance Management andImproving Individual Performance: A Motivational Framework. Management and OrganizationReview, 2(2), 253-277.
DeNisi, A. S., & Sonesh, S. (2011). The appraisal and management of performance at work. In S.Zedeck (Ed.), APA Handbooks in Psychology. APA handbook of industrial and organizationalpsychology, Vol. 2. Selecting and developing members for the organization (pp. 255-279).Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.
DeNisi, A. S., Wilson, M. S., & Biteman, J. (2014). Research and practice in HRM: A historicalperspective. Human Resource Management Review, 24(3), 219-231.
Denison, D. R. (1984). Bringing corporate culture to the bottom line. Organizational Dynamics, 13(2),5-22.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Paradigms and perspectives in transition. Handbook ofQualitative Research, 2, 157-162.
Dessler, G. (2006). A Framework for Human Resource Management. Pearson Education India.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educationalprocess. Lexington, MA: Heath, 35(64), 690-698.
Dewey, J. (1938). 1963. 2007. Experience and education.
Di Milia, L., & Birdi, K. (2010). The relationship between multiple levels of learning practices andobjective and subjective organizational financial performance. Journal of OrganizationalBehavior, 31(4), 481-498.
Diamantopoulos, A., & Riefler, P. (2011). Using formative measures in international marketingmodels: a cautionary tale using consumer animosity as an example. In Measurement andResearch Methods in International Marketing (pp. 11-30). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
202
Dijkstra, Theo (2010), “Latent Variables and Indices: Herman Wold’s Basic Design and Partial LeastSquares,” in Handbook of Partial Least Squares: Concepts, Methods and Applications inMarketing and Related Fields, Vincenzo Esposito Vinzi, Wynne W. Chin, Jörg Henseler, andHuiwen Wang, eds., Berlin: Springer, 23–46.
Dixon, N. M. (2000). Common Knowledge: How Companies Thrive by Sharing What They Know.Harvard Business School Press.
Doornbos, A. J., Simons, R. J., & Denessen, E. (2008). Relations between characteristics of workplacepractices and types of informal work‐related learning: A survey study among DutchPolice. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 19(2), 129-151.
Dorenbosch, L., Engen, M. L. V., & Verhagen, M. (2005). On‐the‐job innovation: the impact of jobdesign and human resource management through production ownership. Creativity andInnovation Management, 14(2), 129-141.
Dorenbosch, L., Reuver, R. d., & Sanders, K. (2006). Getting the HR Message Across: The Linkagebetween Line – HR Consensus and "Commitment Strength" among Hospital Employees.Management Revue, 17(3), 274-291.
Drucker, P. F. (1995). The New Productivity Challenge. Quality in Higher Education, 37, 45-53.
Dust, S. B., Resick, C. J., & Mawritz, M. B. (2014). Transformational leadership, psychologicalempowerment, and the moderating role of mechanistic–organic contexts. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 35(3), 413-433.
Dyer, J. H., & Nobeoka, K. (2000). Creating and Managing A High‐Performance Knowledge‐SharingNetwork: The Toyota Case. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 345-367.
Dyer, L., & Reeves, T. (1995). Human Resource Strategies and Firm Performance: What Do We Knowand Where Do We Need To Go?. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 6(3),656-670.
Eastman, K. K. (1994). In the eyes of the beholder: An attributional approach to ingratiation andorganizational citizenship behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 37(5), 1379-1391.
Edgar, F., & Geare, A. (2009). Inside the “black box” and “HRM”. International Journal ofManpower, 30(3), 220-236.
Ellinger, A. D. (2005). Contextual Factors Influencing Informal Learning in a Workplace Setting: TheCase of “Reinventing Itself Company”. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16(3), 389-415.
Else Ouweneel, A. P., Taris, T. W., van Zolingen, S. J., & Schreurs, P. J. (2009). How taskcharacteristics and social support relate to managerial learning: Empirical evidence from Dutchhome care. The Journal of psychology, 143(1), 28-44.
Enos, M. D., Kehrhahn, M. T., & Bell, A. (2003). Informal Learning and the Transfer of Learning:How Managers Develop Proficiency. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14(4), 369-387.
Eraut*, M. (2004). Informal learning in the workplace. Studies in Continuing Education, 26(2), 247-273.
Eraut, M. (2000). Non‐formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work. British Journal ofEducational Psychology, 70(1), 113-136.
Eraut, M. (2002). Developing Professional Knowledge and Competence. Routledge.
203
F. Hair Jr, J., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L., & G. Kuppelwieser, V. (2014). Partial least squares structuralequation modeling (PLS-SEM) An emerging tool in business research. European BusinessReview, 26(2), 106-121.
Farndale, E., & Sanders, K. (2017). Conceptualizing HRM system strength through a cross-culturallens. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(1), 132-148.
Farr, J. L., & Ford, C. M. (1990). Individual innovation.
Feiz, D., Dehghani Soltani, M., & Farsizadeh, H. (2017). The effect of knowledge sharing on thepsychological empowerment in higher education mediated by organizational memory. Studies inHigher Education, 44(1), 3-19.
Ferguson, K. L., & Reio Jr, T. G. (2010). Human resource management systems and firmperformance. Journal of Management Development, 29(5), 471-494.
Fernandez, S., & Moldogaziev, T. (2012). Using employee empowerment to encourage innovativebehavior in the public sector. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23(1),155-187.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory andresearch.
Fletcher, C., & Williams, R. (1996). Performance management, job satisfaction and organizationalcommitment1. British Journal of Management, 7(2), 169-179.
Flick, U. (2011). Mixing methods, triangulation, and integrated research. Qualitative inquiry andglobal crises, 132.
Flick, U. (Ed.). (2013). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis. Sage.
Fong, K. H., & Snape, E. (2015). Empowering leadership, psychological empowerment and employeeOutcomes: Testing a multi‐level mediating model. British Journal of Management, 26(1), 126-138.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservablevariables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 39-50.
Foss, N. J., Husted, K., & Michailova, S. (2010). Governing knowledge sharing in organizations:Levels of analysis, governance mechanisms, and research directions. Journal of Managementstudies, 47(3), 455-482.
French Jr, J. R. (1956). A formal theory of social power. Psychological Review, 63(3), 181.
Frenkel, S. J., Li, M., & Restubog, S. L. D. (2012A). Management, organizational justice andemotional exhaustion among Chinese migrant workers: Evidence from two manufacturingfirms. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 50(1), 121-147.
Frenkel, S., Restubog, S. L. D., & Bednall, T. (2012B). How employee perceptions of HR policy andpractice influence discretionary work effort and co-worker assistance: evidence from twoorganizations. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(20), 4193-4210.
Fugate, M., Kinicki, A. J., & Prussia, G. E. (2008). Employee coping with organizational change: Anexamination of alternative theoretical perspectives and models. Personnel Psychology, 61(1), 1-36.
204
Gagné, M. (2009). A model of knowledge‐sharing motivation. Human Resource Management, 48(4),571-589.
Gardner, T. M., Moynihan, L. M., Park, H. J., & Wright, P. M. (2001). Beginning to unlock the blackbox in the HR firm performance relationship: the impact of HR practices on employee attitudesand employee outcomes. CAHRS Working Paper Series, 75. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University,School of Industrial and Labor Relations.
Geijsel, Femke P., Sleegers, Peter J. C., Stoel, Reinoud D., & Krüger, Meta L. (2009). The Effect ofTeacher Psychological and School Organizational and Leadership Factors on Teachers'Professional Learning in Dutch Schools. The Elementary School Journal, 109(4), 406-427.
Geisser, S. (1974). A Predictive Approach to the Random Effect Model. Biometrika, 61(1), 101-107.
Gerhart, B., & Milkovich, G. T. (1990). Organizational differences in managerial compensation andfinancial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 663-691.
Gerhart, B., Wright, P. M., & McMahan, G. C. (2000). Measurement error in research on the humanresources and firm performance relationship: Further evidence and analysis. PersonnelPsychology, 53(4), 855-872.
Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Further EducationUnit.
Gijbels, D., Raemdonck, I., & Vervecken, D. (2010). Influencing work-related learning: The role of jobcharacteristics and self-directed learning orientation in part-time vocational education. Vocationsand Learning, 3(3), 239-255.
Gilbert, C., Winne, S. D., & Sels, L. (2015). Strong HRM processes and line managers’ effective HRMimplementation: a balanced view. Human Resource Management Journal, 25(4), 600-616.
Grant, R. M. (1996A). Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments: Organizational capabilityas knowledge integration. Organization Science, 7(4), 375-387.
Grant, R. M. (1996B). Toward a knowledge‐based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal,17(S2), 109-122.
GROOT, E. D., JAARSMA, D., ENDEDIJK, M., MAINHARD, T., LAM, I., SIMONS, R.-J., &BEUKELEN, P. V. (2012). Critically Reflective Work Behavior of Health Care Professionals.Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 31(1), 48-57.
Gruman, J. A., & Saks, A. M. (2011). Performance management and employee engagement. HumanResource Management Review, 21(2), 123-136.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. Handbook ofQualitative Research, 2(163-194), 105.
Guest, D. E. (1997). Human resource management and performance: a review and researchagenda. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 8(3), 263-276.
Guest, D. E. (2011). Human resource management and performance: still searching for someanswers. Human Resource Management Journal, 21(1), 3-13.
Guest, D., & Conway, N. (2011). The impact of HR practices, HR effectiveness and a ‘strong HRsystem’on organisational outcomes: a stakeholder perspective. The International Journal ofHuman Resource Management, 22(8), 1686-1702.
205
Guo, S., & Hussey, D. L. (2004). Nonprobability sampling in social work research: Dilemmas,consequences, and strategies. Journal of Social Service Research, 30(3), 1-18.
Guthrie, J. P. (2001). High-involvement work practices, turnover, and productivity: Evidence fromNew Zealand. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 180-190.
Habermas, J. (1981). Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Beacon Press.
Hair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). A primer on partial least squaresstructural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. Y. A., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2010). RE [2010]: MultivariateData Analysis. A Global Perspective.
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A Primer on Partial Least SquaresStructural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). London, United Kingdom: SAGEPublications Ltd.
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal ofMarketing theory and Practice, 19(2), 139-152.
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). Partial least squares structural equation modeling:Rigorous applications, better results and higher acceptance. Long Range Planning, 46(1-2), 1-12.
Hall, D. T. (1996). Protean Careers of the 21st Century. Academy of Management Executive, 10(4), 8-16.
Hall, R., & Stevens, R. (1996). Teaching/Learning Events in the Workplace: A Comparative Analysisof their organizational and Interactional Structure. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth AnnualConference of the Cognitive Science Society: July 12-15, 1996, University of California, SanDiego (Vol. 18, p. 160). Psychology Press.
Han, S. H., Seo, G., Yoon, S. W., & Yoon, D. Y. (2016). Transformational leadership and knowledgesharing: Mediating roles of employee’s empowerment, commitment, and citizenshipbehaviors. Journal of Workplace Learning, 28(3), 130-149.
Hancer, M., & George, R. T. (2003). Psychological empowerment of non-supervisory employeesworking in full-service restaurants. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 22(1), 3-16.
Hancer, M., George, R. T., & Kim, P. B. (2005). An Examination of Dimensions of PsychologicalEmpowerment Scale for Service Employees. Psychological Reports, 97, 667-672.
Hansen, S., & Avital, M. (2005). Contributing your" wisdom" or showing your cards: A quantitativeinquiry of knowledge sharing behavior. AMCIS 2005 Proceedings, 342.
Haq, M. A. u., Usman, M., & Hussain, J. (2017). Enhancing Employee Innovative Behavior: TheModerating Effects of Organizational Tenure. Pakistan Journal of Commerce and SocialSciences, 11(3).
Harackiewicz, J. M., Sansone, C., & Manderlink, G. (1985). Competence, achievement orientation, andintrinsic motivation: A process analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(2),493.
206
Harley, B., Allen, B. C., & Sargent, L. D. (2007). High performance work systems and employeeexperience of work in the service sector: The case of aged care. British Journal of IndustrialRelations, 45(3), 607-633.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
Hau, Y. S., Kim, B., Lee, H., & Kim, Y. G. (2013). The effects of individual motivations and socialcapital on employees’ tacit and explicit knowledge sharing intentions. International Journal ofInformation Management, 33(2), 356-366.
Hauff, S., Alewell, D., & Hansen, N. K. (2017). HRM System Strength and HRM TargetAchievement—Toward A Broader Understanding of HRM Processes Human ResourceManagement, 56(5), 715-729.
Heathfield, S. (2007). Performance Appraisals Don't Work-What Does?. The Journal for Quality andParticipation, 30(1), 6.
Heider, F. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley, 1958.
Helyer, R. (2015). Learning through reflection: the critical role of reflection in work-based learning(WBL). Journal of Work-Applied Management, 7(1), 15-27.
Henseler, J., & Chin, W. W. (2010). A comparison of approaches for the analysis of interaction effectsbetween latent variables using partial least squares path modeling. Structural EquationModeling, 17(1), 82-109.
Henseler, J., Hubona, G., & Ray, P. A. (2016). Using PLS path modeling in new technology research:updated guidelines. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 116(1), 2-20.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of partial least squares path modeling ininternational marketing. In New Challenges to International Marketing (pp. 277-319). EmeraldGroup Publishing Limited.
Herciu, L. (2015). Pakistan: Another BRICK in the wall. New York, NY: Thomson & Reuters.
Hetidrix, W. H., Robbins, T., Miller, J., & Summers, T. P. (1998). Effects of Procedural andDistributive Justice on Factors Predictive of Turnover. Journal of Social Behavior andPersonality, 13(4), 611-632.
Hewett, R., Shantz, A., Mundy, J., & Alfes, K. (2018). Attribution theories in Human ResourceManagement research: a review and research agenda. The International Journal of HumanResource Management, 29(1), 87-126.
Hicks, E., Bagg, R., Doyle, W., & Young, J. D. (2007). Canadian accountants: Examining workplacelearning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 19(2), 61-77.
Hj Ramli, N. H., Alavi, M., Mehrinezhad, S. A., & Ahmadi, A. (2018). Academic Stress and Self-Regulation among University Students in Malaysia: Mediator Role of Mindfulness. BehavioralSciences, 8(1), 12.
Ho, H. (2010). Theorizing HRM and (Firm) Performance Relationship from the Human NaturePerspective'. International Journal of Arts and Science, 3(7), 327-41.
Hoekstra, A., & Korthagen, F. (2011). Teacher Learning in a Context of Educational Change: InformalLearning Versus Systematically Supported Learning. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(1), 76-92.
207
Hoekstra, A., Korthagen, F., Brekelmans, M., Beijaard, D., & Imants, J. (2009). Experienced teachers’informal workplace learning and perceptions of workplace conditions. Journal of WorkplaceLearning, 21(4), 276-298.
Holley, D., Santos, P., Cook, J., & Kerr, M. (2016). “Cascades, torrents & drowning” in information:seeking help in the contemporary general practitioner practice in the UK. Interactive LearningEnvironments, 24(5), 954-967.
Honey, P., & Mumford, A. (2000). The learning styles helper's guide. Maidenhead: Peter HoneyPublications.
Hooff, B. V. d., Schouten, A. P., & Simonovski, S. (2012). What one feels and what one knows: Theinfluence of emotions on attitudes and intentions towards knowledge sharing. Journal ofKnowledge Management, 16, 148-158.
Hulland, J. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review offour recent studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20(2), 195-204.
Huselid, M. A. (1995). The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity,and corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 635-672.
Huselid, M. A., & Becker, B. E. (2000). Comment on “Measurement error in research on humanresources and firm performance: How much error is there and how does it influence effectsizeestimates?” by Gerhart, Wright, Mc Mahan, and Snell. Personnel Psychology, 53(4), 835-854.
Huselid, M. A., Jackson, S. E., & Schuler, R. S. (1997). Technical and strategic human resourcesmanagement effectiveness as determinants of firm performance. Academy of ManagementJournal, 40(1), 171-188.
Hyde, K. F. (2000). Recognising deductive processes in qualitative research. Qualitative marketresearch: An international journal, 3(2), 82-90.
Ichniowski, C., & Shaw, K. (1999). The effects of human resource management systems on economicperformance: An international comparison of US and Japanese plants. ManagementScience, 45(5), 704-721.
Ichniowski, C., Shaw, K., & Prennushi, G. (1997). The effects of human resource managementpractices on productivity: A study of steel finishing lines. The American Economic Review, 291-313.
Inkpen, A. C. (1998). Learning and knowledge acquisition through international strategicalliances. Academy of Management Perspectives, 12(4), 69-80.
Iorga, M., Dondas, C., & Zugun-Eloae, C. (2018). Depressed as Freshmen, Stressed as Seniors: TheRelationship between Depression, Perceived Stress and Academic Results among MedicalStudents. Behavioral Sciences, 8(8), 70.
Jacobs, R. (2003). Structured on-the-job training: Unleashing employee expertise in the workplace.Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Jacobs, R. L., & Park, Y. (2009). A Proposed Conceptual Framework of Workplace Learning:Implications Development for Theory Development and Research in Human Resource. HumanResource Development Review, 8(2), 133-150.
Jain, K. K. (2005). Knowledge sharing–role of human resource management. Indian Journal ofTraining and Development, 35(4).
208
Janssen, O. (2000). Job demands, perceptions of effort‐reward fairness and innovative workbehaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 73, 287–302.
Janssen, O. (2005). The joint impact of perceived influence and supervisor supportiveness on employeeinnovative behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78, 573–579.
Janssen, O., Van de Vliert, E., & West, M. (2004). The bright and dark sides of individual and groupinnovation: A special issue introduction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(2), 129-145.
Javed, B., Khan, A. A., Bashir, S., & Arjoon, S. (2017). Impact of ethical leadership on creativity: therole of psychological empowerment. Current Issues in Tourism, 20(8), 839-851.
Jayaram, J., Droge, C., & Vickery, S. K. (1999). The impact of human resource management practiceson manufacturing performance. Journal of Operations Management, 18(1), 1-20.
Jeon, K. S., & Kim, K. N. (2012). How do organizational and task factors influence informal learningin the workplace?. Human Resource Development International, 15(2), 209-226.
Jeon, K. S., & Kim, K.-N. (2012). How do organizational and task factors influence informal learningin the workplace? Human Resource Development International, 15(2), 209-226.
Jeon, S., Kim, Y. G., & Koh, J. (2011). An integrative model for knowledge sharing in communities-of-practice. Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(2), 251-269.
Jeong, S., Han, S. J., Lee, J., Sunalai, S., & Yoon, S. W. (2018). Integrative Literature Review onInformal Learning: Antecedents, Conceptualizations, and Future Directions. Human ResourceDevelopment Review, 1-25. doi:10.1177/1534484318772242
Jiang, K., Lepak, D. P., Han, K., Hong, Y., Kim, A., & Winkler, A. L. (2012A). Clarifying theconstruct of human resource systems: Relating human resource management to employeeperformance. Human Resource Management Review, 22(2), 73-85.
Jiang, K., Lepak, D. P., Hu, J., & Baer, J. C. (2012B). How does human resource managementinfluence organizational outcomes? A meta-analytic investigation of mediatingmechanisms. Academy of Management Journal, 55(6), 1264-1294.
Johns, C. (2000). Becoming a reflective practitioner: A reflective and holistic approach to clinicalnursing, practice development and clinical supervision. Oxford: Blackwell Science.
Jong, J. d., & Hartog, D. d. (2010). Measuring Innovative Work Behaviour. Creativity and InnovationManagement, 19(1), 23-36.
Jong, J. P. J. d., & Hartog, D. N. D. (2007). How leaders influence employees’ innovative behaviour.European Journal of Innovation Management, 10(1), 41-64.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIScommand language. Scientific Software International.
Jöreskog, K. G., & Wold, H. (1982). Systems under indirect observation, Part II. North-HollandPublishing Company, Amsterdam, 68, 108.
Kamphorst, J. J., & Swank, O. H. (2018). The role of performance appraisals in motivatingemployees. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 27(2), 251-269.
Kanfer, R. (1992). Work motivation: New directions in theory and research. International Review ofIndustrial and Organizational Psychology, 7, 1-53.
209
Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and Women of the Corporation. New York: Basic Kanter Men and Womenof the Corporation1977.
Kanter, R. M. (1988). When a thousand flowers bloom: Structural, collective, and social conditions forinnovation in organizations: Elsevier Science.
Katou, A. A. (2012). Investigating reverse causality between human resource management policies andorganizational performance in small firms. Management Research Review, 35(2), 134-156.
Katou, A. A., & Budhwar, P. S. (2010). Causal relationship between HRM policies and organisationalperformance: Evidence from the Greek manufacturing sector. European ManagementJournal, 28(1), 25-39.
Katou, A. A., Budhwar, P. S., & Patel, C. (2014). Content Vs. Process In The HRM-PerformanceRelationship: An Empirical Examination. Human Resource Management, 53(4), 527-544.
Katz, D. (1964). The motivational basis of organizational behavior. Behavioral Science, 9, pp. 131-143.
Katz, D., & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The Social Psychology of Organizations. New York: John Wiley &Sons.
Katzenmeyer, M., & Moller, G. (2009). Awakening the sleeping giant: Helping teachers develop asleaders. Corwin Press.
Kaufman, B. E. (2010). SHRM theory in the post‐Huselid era: why it is fundamentallymisspecified. Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society, 49(2), 286-313.
Kaufman, B. E. (2015). The RBV theory foundation of strategic HRM: critical flaws, problems forresearch and practice, and an alternative economics paradigm. Human Resource ManagementJournal, 25(4), 516-540.
Keith, N., Unger, J. M., Rauch, A., & Frese, M. (2016). Informal Learning and EntrepreneurialSuccess: A Longitudinal Study of Deliberate Practice among Small Business Owners. AppliedPsychology: An International Review, 65(3), 515-540.
Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In Nebraska Symposium on Motivation.University of Nebraska Press.
Kelley, H. H. (1973). The processes of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28(2), 107.
Kelley, H. H., & Michela, J. L. (1980). Attribution theory and research. Annual Review ofPsychology, 31(1), 457-501.
Kepes, S., & Delery, J. E. (2006). Designing effective HRM systems: The issue of HRM strategy. TheHuman Resources Revolution: Why Putting People First Matters, 55-76.
Khalid, M. M., Rehman, C. A., & Ashraf, M. (2011). Exploring the link between Kirkpatrick (KP) andcontext, input, process and product (CIPP) training evaluation models, and its effect on trainingevaluation in public organizations of Pakistan. African Journal of Business Management, 6(1),274-279.
Khan, Z. W., Tanveer, M., & Saleem, I. (2013). Analyzing Learning Environment: A ComparativeStudy of Public and Private Sector Schools of Pakistan. Journal of Management &Organizational Studies, 2(1), 49-54.
210
Khilji, S. E., & Wang, X. (2006). ‘Intended’ and ‘implemented’ HRM: the missing linchpin in strategichuman resource management research. The International Journal of Human ResourceManagement, 17(7), 1171-1189.
Killion, J. P., & Todnem, G. R. (1991). A process for personal theory building. EducationalLeadership, 48(6), 14-16.
Kim, W., & Park, J. (2017). Examining Structural Relationships between Work Engagement,Organizational Procedural Justice, Knowledge Sharing, and Innovative Work Behavior forSustainable Organizations. Sustainability, 9(2).
Kivunja, C., & Kuyini, A. B. (2017). Understanding and Applying Research Paradigms in EducationalContexts. International Journal of Higher Education, 6(5), 26-41.
Kleysen, R. F., & Street, C. T. (2001). Toward a multi-dimensional measure of individual innovativebehavior. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 2(3), 284-296.
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: AHistorical Review, a Meta-Analysis, and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention Theory.Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254-284.
Knol, J., & Van Linge, R. (2009). Innovative behaviour: The effect of structural and psychologicalempowerment on nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 65(2), 359-370.
Knowles, M. S. (1984). Andragogy in action: Applying modern principles of adult education.
Koberg, C. S., Boss, R. W., Senjem, J. C., & Goodman, E. A. (1999). Antecedents and outcomes ofempowerment: Empirical evidence from the health care industry. Group & OrganizationManagement, 24(1), 71-91.
Kock, N., & Lynn, G. (2012). Lateral collinearity and misleading results in variance-based SEM: Anillustration and recommendations.
Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning as the science of learning and development.
Kraiger, K., & Ford, J. K. (2007). The Expanding Role of Workplace Training: Themes and TrendsInfluencing Training Research and Practice. (L. L. Koppes ed.). Mahwah, NJ, US: LawrenceErlbaum Associates Publishers.
Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one'sown incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 77(6), 1121.
Kwakman, K. (2003). Factors affecting teachers’ participation in professional learning activities.Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 149-170.
Kyndt, E., Gijbels, D., Grosemans, I., & Donche, V. (2016). Teachers’ everyday professionaldevelopment: Mapping informal learning activities, antecedents, and learning outcomes. Reviewof Educational Research, 86(4), 1111-1150.
Kyndt, E., & Baert, H. (2013). Antecedents of Employees’ Involvement in Work Related Learning: ASystematic Review. Review of Educational Research, 83(2), 273-313.
Kyndt, E., Dochy, F., & Nijs, H. (2009). Learning conditions for non-formal and informal workplacelearning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 21(5), 369-383.
211
Kyndt, E., Govaerts, N., Verbeek, E., & Dochy, F. (2013). Development and validation of aquestionnaire on informal workplace learning outcomes: A study among socio-educational careworkers. The British Journal of Social Work, 44(8), 2391-2410.
Lai, H. J., Wu, M. L., & Li, A. T. (2011). Adults' participation in informal learning activities: Keyfindings from the adult education participation survey in Taiwan. Australian Journal of AdultLearning, 51(3), 409.
Lai, H. J., Wu, M. L., & Li, A. T. (2011). Adults' participation in informal learning activities: Keyfindings from the adult education participation survey in Taiwan. Australian Journal of AdultLearning, 51(3), 409.
Laschinger, H. K. S., Finegan, J., Shamian, J., & Wilk, P. (2001). Impact of structural andpsychological empowerment on job strain in nursing work settings: expanding Kanter’smodel. Journal of Nursing Administration, 31(5), 260-272.
Lawler III, E. E. (1992). The ultimate advantage: Creating the high-involvement organization.
Lawler III, E. E. (1994). From job‐based to competency‐based organizations. Journal ofOrganizational Behavior, 15(1), 3-15.
Lawler, P. A. (2003). Teachers as adult learners: A new perspective. New Directions for Adult andContinuing Education, 2003(98), 15-22.
Ledoux, K., Forchuk, C., Higgins, C., & Rudnick, A. (2018). The effect of organizational and personalvariables on the ability to practice compassionately. Applied Nursing Research, 41, 15-20.
Lee Endres, M., Endres, S. P., Chowdhury, S. K., & Alam, I. (2007). Tacit knowledge sharing, self-efficacy theory, and application to the Open Source community. Journal of KnowledgeManagement, 11(3), 92-103.
Lee, H., & Choi, B. (2003). Knowledge management enablers, processes, and organizationalperformance: An integrative view and empirical examination. Journal of Managementinformation systems, 20(1), 179-228.
Lepak, D. P., & Snell, S. A. (2002). Examining the human resource architecture: The relationshipsamong human capital, employment, and human resource configurations. Journal ofManagement, 28(4), 517-543.
Lepak, D. P., Liao, H., Chung, Y., & Harden, E. E. (2006). A conceptual review of human resourcemanagement systems in strategic human resource management research. In Research inPersonnel and Human Resources Management (pp. 217-271). Emerald Group PublishingLimited.
Lewin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality: Selected papers (DK Adams & KE Zener,Trans.). New York: McGraw.
Lewis, M., & Haviland-Jones, J. M. (2000). Handbook of emotions (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.
Li, J., Brake, G., Champion, A., Fuller, T., Gabel, S., & Hatcher-Busch, L. (2009). Workplace learning:the roles of knowledge accessibility and management. Journal of Workplace Learning, 21(4),347-364.
Li, X. (2010). From a process perspective: How an HRM system influences employee attitudes inChinese hotels. The University of New South Wales.
212
Li, X., Frenkel, S. J., & Sanders, K. (2011). Strategic HRM as process: how HR system andorganizational climate strength influence Chinese employee attitudes. The International Journalof Human Resource Management, 22(9), 1825-1842.
Liao, H., Toya, K., Lepak, D. P., & Hong, Y. (2009). Do they see eye to eye? Management andemployee perspectives of high-performance work systems and influence processes on servicequality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(2), 371.
Liden, R. C., & Arad, S. (1996). A power perspective of empowerment and work groups: Implicationsfor human resources management research. Research in Personnel and Human ResourcesManagement, 14, 205-252.
Lilley, D., & Hinduja, S. (2007). Police officer performance appraisal and overall satisfaction. Journalof Criminal Justice, 35(2), pp. 137-150.
Lin, H.-F. (2007). Knowledge sharing and firm innovation capability: an empirical study. InternationalJournal of Manpower, 28(3/4), 315-332.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry (Vol. 75). Sage.
Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. Springer Science &Business Media.
Lindeman, E. C. (1926). Andragogik: The method of teaching adults. Workers’ Education, 4(3), 8.
Linden, D. V. D., Keijsers, G. P., Eling, P., & Schaijk, R. V. (2005). Work stress and attentionaldifficulties: An initial study on burnout and cognitive failures. Work & Stress, 19(1), 23-36.
Ling, T. N., San, L. Y., & Hock, N. T. (2009). Trust: facilitator of knowledge-sharingculture. Communications of the IBIMA, 7(15), 137-142.
Liu, N. C., & Liu, M. S. (2011). Human resource practices and individual knowledge-sharingbehavior–an empirical study for Taiwanese R&D professionals. The International Journal ofHuman Resource Management, 22(04), 981-997.
Livingstone, D. W. (1999). Exploring The Icebergs Of Adult Learning: Findings Of The First CanadianSurvey Of Informal Learning Practices. WALL Working Paper, 19, 1-23.
Livingstone, D. W. (2001). Expanding notions of work and learning: Profiles of latent power. NewDirections for Adult and Continuing Education, 2001(92), 19-30.
Locke, E. A., & Schweiger, D. M. (1979). Participation in decision-making: One more look. Researchin Organizational Behavior, 1(10), 265-339.
Lodhi, S. A., & Ahmad, M. (2010). Dynamics of Voluntary Knowledge Sharing inOrganizations. Pakistan Journal of Commerce & Social Sciences, 4(2).
Lohman, M. C. (2000). Environmental inhibitors to informal learning in the workplace: A case study ofpublic-school teachers. Adult Education Quarterly, 50(2), 83-101.
Lohman, M. C. (2005). A Survey of Factors Influencing the Engagement of Two Professional Groupsin Informal Workplace Learning Activities. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16(4),501-527.
Lohman, M. C. (2006). Factors influencing teachers' engagement in informal learning activities.Journal of Workplace Learning, 18(3), 141-156.
213
Lohman, M. C. (2009). A survey of factors influencing the engagement of information technologyprofessionals in informal learning activities. Information Technology, Learning, andPerformance Journal, 25, 43-53.
Lohmöller, J. B. (2013). Latent variable path modeling with partial least squares. Springer Science &Business Media.
London, M., & Sessa, V. I. (2006). Group Feedback for Continuous Learning. Human ResourceDevelopment Review, 5(3), 303-329.
Longenecker, C. O., Sims Jr, H. P., & Gioia, D. A. (1987). Behind the mask: The politics of employeeappraisal. Academy of Management Perspectives, 1(3), 183-193.
Luan, J., & Serban, A. M. (2002). Technologies, products, and models supporting knowledgemanagement. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2002(113), 85-104.
MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., & Jarvis, C. B. (2005). The problem of measurement modelmisspecification in behavioral and organizational research and some recommendedsolutions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4), 710.
Macky, K., & Boxall, P. (2007). The relationship between ‘high-performance work practices’ andemployee attitudes: an investigation of additive and interaction effects. The InternationalJournal of Human Resource Management, 18(4), 537-567.
Macky, K., & Boxall, P. (2009). Employee well-being and union membership. New Zealand Journal ofEmployment Relations, 34(3), 14.
Mahmood, K. (2016). Overall Assessment of the Higher Education Sector. Higher EducationCommission (HEC): H-9, Islamabad, Pakistan, 1-80.
Majoka, M. I., & Khan, M. I. (2017). Education Policy Provisions and Objectives. A Review ofPakistani Education Policies. Italian Journal of Sociology of Education, 9(2).
Malcolm, J., Hodkinson, P., & Colley, H. (2003). The interrelationships between informal and formallearning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(7/8), 313-318.
Manuti, A., Pastore, S., Scardigno, A. F., Giancaspro, M. L., & Morciano, D. (2015). Formal andinformal learning in the workplace: a research review. International Journal of Training andDevelopment, 19(1), 1-17.
Marsick, V. J. (1988A). A new era in staff development. New Directions for Adult and ContinuingEducation, 1988 (38), 9-21.
Marsick, V. J. (1988B). Learning in the workplace: The case for Reflectivity and critical reflectivity.Adult Education Quarterly, 38(4), 187-198.
Marsick, V. J. (2009). Toward a unifying framework to support informal learning theory, research andpractice. Journal of Workplace Learning, 21(4), 265-275.
Marsick, V. J., & Volpe, M. (1999). The Nature and Need for Informal Learning. Advances inDeveloping Human Resources, 1(3), 1-9.
Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (1990). Towards a theory of informal and incidental learning.London: Routledge.
Marsick, V. J., & Watkins, K. E. (2001). Informal and incidental learning. New Directions for Adultand Continuing Education, 2001(89), 25-34.
214
Marsick, V. J., Nicolaides, A., & Watkins, K. E. (2014). Adult learning theory and application inHRD. Handbook of Human Resource Development, 40-61.
Marsick, V. J., Nicolaides, A., & Watkins, K. E. (2014). Adult Learning Theory and Application inHRD (N. E. Chalofsky, T. S. Rocco & M. L. Morris ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
Marsick, V. J., Volpe, M., & Watkins, K. E. (1999). Theory and Practice of Informal learning in theknowledge era. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 1 (3), 80-95.
Marsick, V. J., Watkins, K. E., Callahan, M. W., & Volpe, M. (2006). Reviewing Theory and Researchon Informal and Incidental Learning. ERIC. online submission.
Marsick, V., & Watkins, K. (1996). A framework for the learning organization. In Action: Creating theLearning Organization, American Society for Training and Development, Alexandria VA, 3-12.
Mathieu, J. E., Gilson, L. L., & Ruddy, T. M. (2006). Empowerment and team effectiveness: anempirical test of an integrated model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), pp. 97-108.
Maxwell, B. (2014). Improving workplace learning of lifelong learning sector trainee teachers in theUK. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 38(3), 377-399.
Mayer, R. C., & Davis, J. H. (1999). The effect of the performance appraisal system on trust formanagement: A field quasi-experiment. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(1), 123.
Menon, S. (2001). Employee empowerment: An integrative psychological approach. AppliedPsychology, 50(1), 153-180.
Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in Adulthood: AComprehensive Guide. John Wiley & Sons.
Messersmith, J. G., Patel, P. C., Lepak, D. P., & Gould-Williams, J. S. (2011). Unlocking the BlackBox: Exploring the Link Between High-Performance Work Systems and Performance. Journalof Applied Psychology, 96(6), 1105-1118.
Mihail, D. M., & Kloutsiniotis, P. V. (2016). The effects of high-performance work systems on hospitalemployees' work-related well-being: Evidence from Greece. European ManagementJournal, 34(4), 424-438.
Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (1984). Designing Strategic Human Resources Systems (pp. 36-52).Institute of Industrial Relations, University of California.
Montani, F., Odoardi, C., & Battistelli, A. (2014). Individual and contextual determinants of innovativework behaviour: Proactive goal generation matters. Journal of Occupational and OrganizationalPsychology, 87(4), 645-670.
Moolenaar, N. M., Daly, A. J., & Sleegers, P. J. (2010). Occupying the principal position: Examiningrelationships between transformational leadership, social network position, and schools’innovative climate. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(5), 623-670.
Morgan, D. L. (2007). Paradigms lost and pragmatism regained: Methodological implications ofcombining qualitative and quantitative methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 48-76.
Morgeson, F. P., & Campion, M. A. (2003). Work design. Handbook of Psychology: Industrial andOrganizational Psychology, 12(2), 423-452.
215
Mumford, A., & Honey, P. (1992). Questions and answers on learning styles questionnaire. Industrialand Commercial Training, 24(7).
Mumford, M. D. (2000). Managing creative people: Strategies and tactics for innovation. HumanResource Management Review, 10(3), 313-351.
Murphy, K. R., & Cleveland, J. (1995). Understanding Performance Appraisal: Social,Organizational, and Goal-Based Perspectives. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
Nankervis, A., Miyamoto, Y., Taylor, R., & Milton-Smith, J. (2005). Managing Services. CambridgeUniversity Press.
Nawab, A. (2011). Workplace learning in Pakistani schools: a myth or reality?. Journal of WorkplaceLearning, 23(7), 421-434.
Neal, A., West, M. A., & Patterson, M. G. (2005). Do organizational climate and competitive strategymoderate the relationship between human resource management and productivity?. Journal ofManagement, 31(4), 492-512.
Neher, M. S., Ståhl, C., & Nilsen, P. (2015). Learning opportunities in rheumatology practice: aqualitative study. Journal of Workplace Learning, 27(4), 282-297.
Newmann, F. M., King, M. B., & Youngs, P. (2000). Professional development that addresses schoolcapacity: Lessons from urban elementary schools. American Journal of Education, 108(4), 259-299.
Ngari, J. M. K., & Ndirangu, L. N. (2014). Effects of Performance Appraisal Quality on Performanceof Employee in the Financial Sector: A Case of Investment Management Firms in Kenya.
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: Amodel and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.
Nicol, J. S., & Dosser, I. (2016). Understanding reflective practice. Nursing Standard, 30(36).
Nilsson, S., & Rubenson, K. (2014). On the determinants of employment-related organised educationand informal learning. Studies in Continuing Education, 36(3), 304-321.
Nisbet, G., Dunn, S., & Lincoln, M. (2015). Interprofessional team meetings: Opportunities forinformal interprofessional learning. Journal of interprofessional care, 29(5), 426-432.
Nishii, L. H., & Wright, P. M. (2007). Variability within organizations: implications for strategichuman resource management. CAHRS Working Paper #07–02.
Nishii, L. H., Lepak, D. P., & Schneider, B. (2008). Employee attributions of the “why” of HRpractices: Their effects on employee attitudes and behaviors, and customersatisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 61(3), 503-545.
Noe, R. A., & Wilk, S. L. (1993). Investigation of the factors that influence employees' participation indevelopment activities. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(2), 291.
Noe, R. A., Clarke, A. D. M., & Klein, H. J. (2014). Learning in the Twenty-First Century Workplace.The Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 1, 245-275.
Noe, R. A., Tews, M. J., & Dachner, A. M. (2010). Learner Engagement: A New Perspective forEnhancing Our Understanding of Learner Motivation and Workplace Learning. The Academy ofManagement Annals, 4(1), 279-315.
216
Noe, R. A., Tews, M. J., & Marand, A. D. (2013). Individual differences and informal learning in theworkplace. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 83, 327-335.
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese CompaniesCreate the Dynamics of Innovation (Vol. 1). New York: Oxford University Press.
Nonaka, I., Toyama, R., & Hirata, T. (2008). Managing Flow: A Process Theory of the Knowledge-Based Firm. Springer.
O'Dell, C., & Grayson Jr, C. J. (1998). The transfer of internal knowledge and best practice: if only weknew what we know. New York, NY, 10020.
Omri, W. (2015). Innovative behavior and venture performance of SMEs: The moderating effect ofenvironmental dynamism. European Journal of Innovation Management, 18(2), 195-217.
Organ, D. W. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior: It's construct clean-up time. HumanPerformance, 10(2), 85-97.
Orlitzky, M., & Frenkel, S. J. (2005). Alternative pathways to high-performance workplaces. TheInternational Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(8), 1325-1348.
Orvis, K. A., & Leffler, G. P. (2011). Individual and contextual factors: An interactionist approach tounderstanding employee self-development. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(2), 172-177.
Ostroff, C., & Bowen, D. E. (2000). Moving HR to a higher level: HR practices and organizationaleffectiveness. In S. W. J. Kozlowski & K. J. Klein (Eds.), Multilevel Theory, Research, andMethods in Organizations (pp. pp. 211–266). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ostroff, C., & Bowen, D. E. (2016). Reflections on the 2014 Decade Award: Is There Strength In TheConstruct Of Hr System Strength? Academy of Management Review, 41(2), 196-214.
Özbebek, A., & Toplu, E. K. (2011). Empowered Employees’ Knowledge SharingBehavior. International Journal of Business and Management Studies, 3(2), 69-76.
Palaniammal, V. S., Iswarya, S., & Dr.B.Saravanan. (2016). Performance Appraisal System ofEmployees at Private Metals and Alloys Pvt. Ltd in Vellore. International Journal for Researchin Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET), 4(9), 173-179.
Parker, S. K., & Griffin, M. A. (2011). Understanding active psychological states: Embeddingengagement in a wider nomological net and closer attention to performance. European Journalof Work and Organizational Psychology, 20(1), 60-67.
Parsons, M., & Stephenson, M. (2005). Developing reflective practice in student teachers: collaborationand critical partnerships. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 11(1), 95-116.
Paul, R. J., Niehoff, B. P., & Turnley, W. H. (2000). Empowerment, expectations, and thepsychological contract-managing the dilemmas and gaining the advantages. The Journal ofSocio-Economics, 29(5), 471-485.
Peng, J., Zhang, G., Fu, Z., & Tan, Y. (2014). An empirical investigation on organizational innovationand individual creativity. Information Systems and e-Business Management, 12(3), 465-489.
Pereira, C. M. M., & Gomes, J. F. S. (2012). The strength of human resource practices andtransformational leadership: impact on organisational performance. The International Journal ofHuman Resource Management, 23(20), pp. 4301-4318.
217
Petter, S., Straub, D., & Rai, A. (2007). Specifying formative constructs in information systemsresearch. MIS Quarterly, 623-656.
Pfeffer, J., & Jeffrey, P. (1998). The human equation: Building profits by putting people first. HarvardBusiness Press.
Pfeffer, J., & Villeneuve, F. (1994). Competitive advantage through people: Unleashing the power ofthe work force (Vol. 61). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Phung, V. D., Hawryszkiewycz, I., Chandran, D., & Ha, B. M. (2017). Knowledge Sharing andInnovative Work Behaviour: A Case Study from Vietnam. Paper presented at the AustralasianConference on Information Systems, Hobart, Australia.
Piening, E. P., Baluch, A. M., & Ridder, H.-G. (2014). Mind the Intended- Implemented Gap:Understanding Employees’ Perceptions Of HRM. Human Resource Management, 53(4), 545-567.
Pieterse, A. N., Knippenberg, D. v., Schippers, M., & Stam, D. (2010). Transformational andtransactional leadership and innovative behavior: The moderating role of psychologicalempowerment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(4), pp. 609-623.
Pifer, M. J., Baker, V. L., & Lunsford, L. G. (2015). Academic departments as networks of informallearning: faculty development at liberal arts colleges. International Journal for AcademicDevelopment, 20(2), 178-192.
Ployhart, R. E., & Moliterno, T. P. (2011). Emergence of the Human Capital Resource: A MultilevelModel. Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 127-150.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases inbehavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal ofapplied Psychology, 88(5), 879.
Polonsky, M. J., & Waller, D. S. (2018). Designing and managing a research project: A businessstudent's guide. Sage publications.
Purcell, J., & Hutchinson, S. (2007). Front‐line managers as agents in the HRM‐performance causalchain: theory, analysis and evidence. Human Resource Management Journal, 17(1), 3-20.
Quinn, R. E., & Spreitzer, G. M. (1997). The road to empowerment: Seven questions every leadershould consider. Organizational Dynamics, 26(2), 37-49.
Rasheed, M. I., Aslam, H. D., Yousaf, S., & Noor, A. (2011). A critical analysis of performanceappraisal system for teachers in public sector universities of Pakistan: A case study of theIslamia University of Bahawalpur (IUB). African Journal of Business Management, 5(9), 3735-3744.
Reece, I., & Walker, S. (2016). Teaching, training and learning: A practical guide. Business EducationPublishers Ltd.
Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J. M. (2017). SmartPLS 3. Boenningstedt: SmartPLS GmbH,http://www. smartpls. com.
Roberts, G. E. (2003). Employee Performance Appraisal System Participation: A Technique thatWorks. Public Personnel Management, 32(1), pp. 89–98.
Rothwell, W., Lindholm, J., & Wallick, W. G. (2003). What CEOs expect from corporate training:Building workplace learning and performance initiatives that advance. New York: AMACOM.
218
Rousseau, D. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwrittenagreements. Sage Publications.
Rowe, A. D., & Fitness, J. (2018). Understanding the Role of Negative Emotions in Adult Learningand Achievement: A Social Functional Perspective. Behavioral Sciences, 8(2), 27.
Runhaar, P., & Sanders, K. (2016). Promoting teachers’ knowledge sharing. The fostering roles ofoccupational self-efficacy and Human Resources Management. Educational ManagementAdministration & Leadership, 44(5), 794-813.
Ryua, S., Hob, S. H., & Han, I. (2003). Knowledge sharing behavior of physicians in hospitals. ExpertSystems with Applications, 25(113-122).
Saba, F. (2003). Distance education theory, methodology, and epistemology: A pragmaticparadigm. Handbook of Distance Education, 1, 3-20.
Sadegh, T. (2015). Introducing a Model of Relationship between Knowledge Sharing Behavior, OCB,Psychological Empowerment and Psychological Capital: A Two-Wave Study. American Journalof Applied Psychology, 4(4), 95-104.
Sagnak, M. (2012). The empowering leadership and teacher’s innovative behavior: The mediating roleof innovation climate. African Journal of Business Management, 6(4), 1635-1641.
Sanders, K., & Frenkel, S. (2011). HR-line management relations: characteristics and effects. TheInternational Journal of Human Resource Management, 22(8), 1611-1617.
Sanders, K., & Yang, H. (2016). The HRM process approach: The influence of employees’ attributionto explain the HRM‐performance relationship. Human Resource Management, 55(2), 201-217.
Sanders, K., Dorenbosch, L., & de Reuver, R. (2008). The impact of individual and shared employeeperceptions of HRM on affective commitment: Considering climate strength. PersonnelReview, 37(4), 412-425.
Sanders, K., Shipton, H., & Gomes, J. F. (2014). Guest editors’ introduction: Is the HRM processimportant? Past, current, and future challenges. Human Resource Management, 53(4), 489-503.
Sarkar, A., & Singh, M. (2012). Non-work Domain Control as an Additional Dimension ofPsychological Empowerment of Women Teachers. Psychological Studies, 57(1), 86-94.
Sarkar, M. B., Echambadi, R., Cavusgil, S. T., & Aulakh, P. S. (2001). The influence ofcomplementarity, compatibility, and relationship capital on alliance performance. Journal of theAcademy of Marketing Science, 29(4), 358-373.
Saunders, M. N., & Lewis, P. (2012). Doing research in business & management: An essential guide toplanning your project. Pearson.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students. Pearsoneducation.
Savaneviciene, A., & Stankeviciute, Z. (2011). Human resource management practices linkage withorganizational commitment and job satisfaction. Economics & Management, 16.
Schei, V., & Nerbo, I. (2015). The invisible learning ceiling: Informal learning among preschoolteachers and assistants in a Norwegian kindergarten. Human Resource Development Quarterly,26, 299-328.
Schneider, B. (1990). Organizational climate and culture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990.
219
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner how professionals think in action.
Schön, D. A. (1992). The theory of inquiry: Dewey's legacy to education. Curriculum Inquiry, 22(2),119-139.
Schugurensky, D. (2000). The forms of informal learning: Towards a conceptualization of the field.
Schürmann, E., & Beausaert, S. (2016). What are drivers for informal learning?. European Journal ofTraining and Development, 40(3), 130-154.
Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1994). Determinants of Innovative Behavior: A Path Model of IndividualInnovation in theWorkplace. The Academy of Management Journal, 37(3), 580-607.
Scott, S. G., & Bruce, R. A. (1998). Following the Leader in R&D: The Joint Effect of SubordinateProblem-Solving Style and Leader-Member Relations on Innovative Behavior. IEEETransactions on Engineering Management, 45(1), 3-10.
Seibert, S. E., Silver, S. R., & Randolph, W. A. (2004). Taking Empowerment to the Next Level: AMultiple-Level Model of Empowerment, Performance, And Satisfaction. Academy ofManagement Journal, 47(3), 332-349.
Seibert, S. E., Wang, G., & Courtright, S. H. (2011). Antecedents and Consequences of Psychologicaland Team Empowerment in Organizations: A Meta-Analytic Review. Journal of AppliedPsychology, 96(5), 981–1003.
Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2003). Research methodology for business.
Senge, P. M. (1991). The fifth discipline, the art and practice of the learningorganization. Performance+ Instruction, 30(5), 37-37.
Shahnawaz, M. G., & Juyal, R. C. (2006). Human resource management practices and organizationalcommitment in different organizations. Journal of the Indian Academy of AppliedPsychology, 32(3), 171-178.
Shantz, A., Arevshatian, L., Alfes, K., & Bailey, C. (2016). The effect of HRM attributions onemotional exhaustion and the mediating roles of job involvement and work overload. HumanResource Management Journal, 26(2), 172-191.
Shipton, H., West, M. A., Dawson, J., Birdi, K., & Patterson, M. (2006). HRM as a predictor ofinnovation. Human Resource Management Journal, 16(1), 3-27.
Sibaran, R. M., Tjakraatmadja, J. H., Putro, U. S., & Munir, N. S. (2015). The Influence ofmultigenerational workforce in effective informal team learning. Journal of Economics andBusiness Research, 21(2), 199-127.
Siegall, M., & Gardner, S. (2000). Contextual factors of psychological empowerment. PersonnelReview, 29(6), 703-722.
Skule, S. (2004). Learning conditions at work: a framework to understand and assess informal learningin the workplace. International Journal of Training and Development, 8(1), 8-20.
Slatten, T., & Mehmetoglu, M. (2011). What are the drivers for innovative behavior in frontline jobs?A study of the hospitality industry in Norway. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality &Tourism, 10(3), 254-272.
Smith, M. (1987). Feedback as a performance management technique. Management Solutions. 32, 20-9.
220
Smylie, M. A. (1988). The enhancement function of staff development: Organizational andpsychological antecedents to individual teacher change. American Educational ResearchJournal, 25(1), 1-30.
Somech, A., & Drach-Zahavy, A. (2000). Understanding extra-role behavior in schools: Therelationships between job satisfaction, sense of efficacy, and teachers’ extra-rolebehavior. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(5-6), 649-659.
SPREITZER, G. (2007). Giving peace a chance: Organizational leadership, empowerment, and peace.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 1077-1095.
Spreitzer, G. (2008). Taking Stock: A Review of More Than Twenty Years of Research onEmpowerment at Work. In J. Barling & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Handbook of OrganizationalBehavior (pp. 54–72). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Spreitzer, G. M. (1995). Psychological Empowerment in the Workplace: Dimensions, Measurement,and Validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38(5), 1442-1465.
Spreitzer, G. M. (1996). Social Structucal characteristics of psychological empowerment. Academy ofManagement Review, 39(2), 483-504.
Spreitzer, G. M., & Quinn, R. E. (1996). Empowering middle managers to be transformationalleaders. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32(3), 237-261.
Spreitzer, G. M., Janasz, S. C. d., & Quinn, R. E. (1999). Empowered to Lead: The Role ofPsychological Empowerment in Leadership. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20(4), 511-526.
Spreitzer, G. M., Kizilos, M. A., & Nason, S. W. (1997). Dimensional Analysis of the Relationshipbetween Psychological Empowerment and Effectiveness, Satisfaction, and Strain. Journal ofManagement, 23(5), 679-704.
Srivastava, A., Bartol, K. M., & Locke, E. A. (2006). Empowering leadership in management teams:Effects on knowledge sharing, efficacy, and performance. Academy of ManagementJournal, 49(6), 1239-1251.
Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998). Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 240.
Stander, M. W., & Rothmann, S. (2009). Psychological empowerment of employees in selectedorganizations in South Africa. South Asian Journal of Industrial Psychology, 35(1), 196-203.
Stone, M. (1974). Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. Journal of theRoyal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 111-147.
Strimel, G., Reed, P., Dooley, G., Bolling, J., Phillips, M., & Cantu, D. V. (2014). Integrating andmonitoring informal learning in education and training. Techniques: Connecting Education &Careers, 89(3), 48-54.
Stumpf, S. A., Doh, J. P., & Tymon Jr, W. G. (2010). The strength of HR practices in India and theireffects on employee career success, performance, and potential. Human ResourcesManagement, 49(3), 353-375.
Subramony, M. (2009). A Meta-Analytic Investigation of The Relationship Between HRM Bundlesand Firm Performance. Human Resource Management, 48(5), 745-768.
221
Sutherland Olsen, D. (2016). Adult learning in innovative organisations. European Journal ofEducation, 51(2), 210-226.
Svensson, L., Ellström, P. E., & Åberg, C. (2004). Integrating formal and informal learning atwork. Journal of Workplace Learning, 16(8), 479-491.
Takeuchi, R., Chen, G., & Lepak, D. P. (2009). Through the Looking Glass of A Social System: Cross‐Level Effects of High‐Performance Work Systems on Employees’ attitudes. PersonnelPsychology, 62(1), 1-29.
Takeuchi, R., Lepak, D. P., Wang, H., & Takeuchi, K. (2007). An empirical examination of themechanisms mediating between high-performance work systems and the performance ofJapanese organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 1069.
Tandung, J. C. (2016). The link between HR attributions and employees' turnover intentions. GadjahMada International Journal of Business, 18(1), 55.
Tannenbaum, S. I., Beard, R. L., McNall, L. A., & Salas, E. (2010). Informal Learning andDevelopment in Organizations (S. W. J. Kozlowski & E. Salas ed.). New York, NY, US:Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
Taylor, S. S., Fisher, D., & Dufresne, R. L. (2002). The aesthetics of management storytelling: A keyto organizational learning. Management Learning, 33(3), 313-330.
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2003). Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods inthe social and behvioral sciences. Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & BehavioralResearch, 3-50.
Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V. E., Chatelin, Y. M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modeling. ComputationalStatistics & Data Analysis, 48(1), 159-205.
Terpstra, D. E., & Rozell, E. J. (1993). The relationship of staffing practices to organizational levelmeasures of performance. Personnel Psychology, 46(1), 27-48.
Terry Kim, Taegoo, Gyehee Lee, Soyon Paek, and Seunggil Lee. "Social capital, knowledge sharingand organizational performance: what structural relationship do they have inhotels?." International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 25, no. 5 (2013): 683-704.
Thayer, F. C. (1987). Performance appraisal and merit pay systems: The disasters multiply. Review ofPublic Personnel Administration, 7(2), 36-53.
Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognitive Elements of Empowerment: An "Interpretive"Model of Intrinsic Task Motivation. The Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 666-681.
Thurlings, M., Evers, A. T., & Vermeulen, M. (2015). Toward a model of explaining teachers’innovative behavior: A literature review. Review of Educational Research, 85(3), 430-471.
Tikkanen, T. (2002). Learning at work in technology intensive environments. Journal of WorkplaceLearning, 14(3), 89-97.
Toossi, M. (2009). Labor force projections to 2018: Older workers staying more active. Monthly LaborReview, 132(11), 30-51.
Torunn Bjørk, I., Tøien, M., & Lene Sørensen, A. (2013). Exploring informal learning among hospitalnurses. Journal of Workplace Learning, 25(7), 426-440.
222
Treadway, D. C., Ferris, G. R., Duke, A. B., Adams, G. L., & Thatcher, J. B. (2007). The moderatingrole of subordinate political skill on supervisors' impressions of subordinate ingratiation andratings of subordinate interpersonal facilitation. Journal of Applied psychology, 92(3), 848.
Trust, T. (2017). Motivation, empowerment, and innovation: Teachers' beliefs about how participatingin the Edmodo math subject community shapes teaching and learning. Journal of Research onTechnology in Education, 49(1-2), 16-30.
Tziner, A., Murphy, K. R., Cleveland, J. N., Beaudin, G., & Marchand, S. (1998). Impact of RaterBeliefs Regarding Performance Appraisal And Its Organizational Context On Appraisal Quality.Journal of Business and Psychology, 12(4), 457-467.
Tzokas, N., & Saren, M. (2004). Competitive advantage, knowledge and relationship marketing: where,what and how?. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 19(2), 124-135.
Úbeda-García, M., Marco-Lajara, B., García-Lillo, F., & Sabater-Sempere, V. (2013). Universalisticand Contingent perspectives on human resource management: an empirical study of the Spanishhotel industry. Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 12(1), 26-51.
Uner, S., & Turan, S. (2010). The construct validity and reliability of the Turkish version of Spreitzer'spsychological empowerment scale. BMC public health, 10(1), 117.
Van Baalen, P., Bloemhof-Ruwaard, J., & Van Heck, E. (2005). Knowledge Sharing in an EmergingNetwork of Practice: The Role of a Knowledge Portal. European Management Journal, 23(3),300-314.
Van De Voorde, K., & Beijer, S. (2015). The role of employee HR attributions in the relationshipbetween high‐performance work systems and employee outcomes. Human ResourceManagement Journal, 25(1), 62-78.
Van den Boom, G., Paas, F., Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Van Gog, T. (2004). Reflection prompts andtutor feedback in a web-based learning environment: Effects on students' self-regulated learningcompetence. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(4), 551-567.
Van Den Hooff, B., & De Ridder, J. A. (2004). Knowledge sharing in context: the influence oforganizational commitment, communication climate and CMC use on knowledgesharing. Journal of knowledge management, 8(6), 117-130.
Van Der Heijden, B., Boon, J., Van der Klink, M., & Meijs, E. (2009). Employability enhancementthrough formal and informal learning: an empirical study among Dutch non‐academic universitystaff members. International Journal of Training and Development, 13(1), 19-37.
Van der Vegt, G., & Janssen, O. (2003). Joint Impact of Interdependence and Group Diversity onInnovation. Journal of Management & Organization, 29(5), 729–751.
Van Eekelen, I. M., Boshuizen, H. P. A., & Vermunt, J. D. (2005). Self-regulation in higher educationteacher learning. Higher Education, 50(3), 447-471.
van Woerkom, M. (2003). Critical reflection at work: Bridging individual and organizational learning.Twente: Twente University Press.
Veld, M., Paauwe, J., & Boselie, P. (2010). HRM and strategic climates in hospitals: does the messagecome across at the ward level?. Human Resource Management Journal, 20(4), 339-356.
Viskovic, A. (2006). Becoming a tertiary teacher: learning in communities of practice. HigherEducation Research & Development, 25(4), 323-339.
223
Vrasidas, C., & Glass, G. V. (2004). Teacher professional development. Online ProfessionalDevelopment for Teachers, 1-11.
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. 1964. NY: John Wiley & Sons, 45.
Wahab, M. S. A., Saad, R. A.-J., & Samsudin, M. A. M. (2016). Situational Inhibitors to InformalLearning in the Workplace: A Case Study of Accountants. The European Proceedings of Social& Behavioural Sciences, 26-31. doi:10.15405/epsbs.2016.08.5
Wall, T. D., & Wood, S. J. (2005). The romance of human resource management and businessperformance, and the case for big science. Human Relations, 58(4), 429-462.
Wallace, J. C., Johnson, P. D., Mathe, K., & Paul, J. (2011). Structural and psychologicalempowerment climates, performance, and the moderating role of shared felt accountability: amanagerial perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(4), pp. 840-850.
Walton, R. E. (1985). Toward a strategy of eliciting employee commitment based on policies ofmutuality. HRM Trends and Challenges, 49.
Wan, F., Williamson, P. J., & Yin, E. (2015). Antecedents and implications of disruptive innovation:Evidence from China. Technovation, 39-40, 94-104.
Wang, D., Waldman, D. A., & Zhang, Z. (2014). A meta-analysis of shared leadership and teameffectiveness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(2), 181.
Watkins, K. E., & Marsick, V. J. (1992). Towards a theory of informal and incidental learning inorganizations. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 11(4), 287-300.
Watkins, K. E., & Marsick, V. J. (1993). Sculpting the learning organization: Consulting using actiontechnologies. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 1993(58), 81-90.
Watkins, K. E., & Marsick, V. J. (1997). Dimensions of learning organization(DLOQ)[survey]. Warwick, RI: Partners for the Learning Organization.
Watkins, K. E., Yang, B., & Marsick, V. J. (1997, March). Measuring dimensions of the learningorganization. In Proceedings of the 1997 Annual Academy of HRD Conference (pp. 543-546).
Weiner, B. (1979). A theory of motivation for some classroom experiences. Journal of EducationalPsychology, 71(1), 3.
Weiner, B. (2008). Reflections on the history of attribution theory and research: People, personalities,publications, problems. Social Psychology, 39(3), 151-156.
Wellins, R. S. (1991). Empowered teams: Creating self-directed work groups that improve quality,productivity, and participation. Jossey-Bass Inc., 350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA94104-1310.
Werts, C. E., Linn, R. L., & Joreskog, K. G. (1974). Quantifying unmeasured variables. Measurementin the Social Sciences. Chicago: Aldine, 270-92.
White, M., & Bryson, A. (2013). Positive employee attitudes: how much human resource managementdo you need?. Human Relations, 66(3), 385-406.
Woerkom, M. v. (2004). The Concept of Critical Reflection and Its Implications for Human ResourceDevelopment. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 6(2), 178-192.
224
Woerkom, M. V., Nijhof, W. J., & Nieuwenhuis, L. F. (2002). Critical reflective working behavior: Asurvey research. Journal of European Industrial Training, 26, 375-383.
Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizationalcreativity. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 293-321.
Wright, P. M., & Gardner, T. M. (2000). Theoretical and empirical challenges in studying: the HRpractice-firm performance relationship. CAHRS Working Paper Series. 83.
Wright, P. M., & Gardner, T. M. (2003). The human resource-firm performance relationship:methodological and theoretical challenges. The new workplace: A guide to the human impact ofmodern working practices, pp.311-328.
Wright, P. M., & Nishii, L. H. (2007). Strategic HRM and organizational behavior: Integrating multiplelevels of analysis. CAHRS Working Paper Series, 468.
Wright, P. M., Gardner, T. M., & Moynihan, L. M. (2003). The impact of HR practices on theperformance of business units. Human Resource Management Journal, 13(3), 21-36.
Wright, P. M., Gardner, T. M., Moynihan, L. M., & Allen, M. R. (2005). The relationship between HRpractices and firm performance: Examining causal order. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 409-446.
Wright, P. M., Gardner, T. M., Moynihan, L. M., Park, H. J., Gerhart, B., & Delery, J. E. (2001).Measurement error in research on human resources and firm performance: Additional data andsuggestions for future research. Personnel Psychology, 54(4), 875-901.
Wu, F., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2006). Organizational learning, commitment, and joint value creation ininterfirm relationships. Journal of Business Research, 59(1), 81-89.
Yoo, J. (2017). Customer power and frontline employee voice behavior: Mediating roles ofpsychological empowerment. European Journal of Marketing, 51(1), 238-256.
Youndt, M. A., Snell, S. A., Dean Jr, J. W., & Lepak, D. P. (1996). Human resource management,manufacturing strategy, and firm performance. Academy of Management Journal, 39(4), 836-866.
Yousaf, A., Sanders, K., & Yustantio, J. (2018). High commitment HRM and organizational andoccupational turnover intentions: the role of organizational and occupational commitment. TheInternational Journal of Human Resource Management, 29(10), 1661-1682.
Yu, B. T. W., & To, W. M. (2013). The effect of internal information generation and dissemination oncasino employee work related behaviors. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 33,475-483.
Yu, P., Wu, J.-J., Chen, I.-H., & Lin, Y.-T. (2007). Is playfulness a benefit to work? Empiricalevidence of professionals in Taiwan. International Journal of Technology Management, 39(3/4),pp. 412-429.
Feilzer, M. Y (2010). Doing mixed methods research pragmatically: Implications for the rediscovery ofpragmatism as a research paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(1), 6-16.
Zhang, X., & Kwan, H. K. (2018). Empowering leadership and team creativity: The roles of teamlearning behavior, team creative efficacy, and team task complexity. In Creative Leadership (pp.95-121). Routledge.
225
Zhang, Y., Zheng, J., & Darko, A. (2018). How Does Transformational Leadership Promote Innovationin Construction? The Mediating Role of Innovation Climate and the Multilevel Moderation Roleof Project Requirements. Sustainability, 10(5).
Zhu, C. (2015). Organisational culture and technology-enhanced innovation in higher education,Technology, Pedagogy and Education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 24(1), 65–79.
Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (Eds.). (2013). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement:Theoretical perspectives. Routledge.
Zimmerman, M. (2000). Empowerment Theory (Vol. 43-63): Plenum Publishers.
Zimmerman, M. A. (1990). Toward a Theory of Learned Hopefulness: A Structural Model Analysis ofParticipation and Empowerment. Journal of Research in Personality, 24, 71-86.
Zimmerman, M. A. (1995). Psychological Empowerment: Issues and Illustrations. American Journal ofCommunity Psychology, 23(5), 581-599.
226
Annexure-I
COMSATS UniversityIslamabad
(Department of Management Sciences)
Dear Sir/Madam,Assalam-o-Alikum
This survey is conducted as a partial requirement for the completion of the Doctor ofPhilosophy in Management Sciences, COMSATS University, Islamabad.
The aim of this study is to link performance appraisal quality with employeeparticipation in informal learning activities through psychological empowerment withsupport from HRM system strength.
I would like to invite your participation in this survey by filling up the attachedquestionnaires. All information will be treated with the strict confidentiality and onlythe aggregate data will be analyzed. In other words, individuals who respond to thisquestionnaire will not be identified.
The survey will take approximately 15 - 20 minutes and your participation is verymuch appreciated.
Thank you for your valuable assistance.
Prepared byAamer Waheed SattiDoctoral Student, Department of Management SciencesCIIT, Islamabad
Supervised byProf. Dr. Qaisar AbbasDirector, CIIT, Lahore Campus.
Co-Supervised byDr. Omer Farooq MalikAssistant ProfessorDepartment of Management SciencesCIIT, Islamabad
227
Section A: Informal Learning ActivitiesThe following set of statements describes your participation in Informal Learning Activities in your current
organization. For each statement, please indicate to which extent you feel it is agreeable or disagreeable.Please Encircle or Tick () one answer. There is no right or wrong answer.
Reflection
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 I think about what I find important in my job 1 2 3 4 5
2 I check if I move forward in reaching my goals in my job 1 2 3 4 5
3 I compare my functioning with how I functioned a year ago 1 2 3 4 5
4 I compare my functioning with that from my colleagues 1 2 3 4 5
Knowledge Sharing
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 I share my knowledge and experiences with my colleagues on a regularbasis 1 2 3 4 5
2 I discuss with my colleagues what I think is important in my job 1 2 3 4 5
3 I discuss problems in my classroom teaching with others in order tolearn from them 1 2 3 4 5
4 I ask my colleagues for advice on a regular basis 1 2 3 4 5
Innovative Behavior
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 I come up with creative solutions for problems 1 2 3 4 5
2 I go searching for new methods and ways to work 1 2 3 4 5
3 I promote and defend my innovative ideas to others 1 2 3 4 5
4 I try to convince colleagues of alternatives ways to work 1 2 3 4 5
5 I try to reach agreement about new ways to realize tasks 1 2 3 4 5
228
Section B: HRM System StrengthThe following set of statements describes your perception of HRM system in appraisal process by your
organization. For each statement, please indicate to which extent you feel it is agreeable or disagreeable.Please Encircle or Tick () one answer. There is no right or wrong answer.
HRM Distinctiveness
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 In our organization it is clear what belongs to the tasks and what’soutside the field of HR. 1 2 3 4 5
2 When one asks the HR department for help, they provide clearanswers. 1 2 3 4 5
3 The procedures and practices developed by HR are easy to understand. 1 2 3 4 5
4 In general, the HR employees in this organization are highlyappreciated. 1 2 3 4 5
5 The HR department undertakes exactly those actions that meet ourneeds. 1 2 3 4 5
6 The employees in this organization experience the HR practices asrelevant. 1 2 3 4 5
HRM Consistency
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 The suggestions, procedures, and practices that HR comes up withactually contribute to the better functioning of this organization. 1 2 3 4 5
2 The HR instruments for staff appraisal succeed in reinforcing thedesired behaviors. 1 2 3 4 5
3 The appraisal system is designed in such a way that desiredperformances are being encouraged. 1 2 3 4 5
4 One can have faith that the HR practices realize the goals for whichthey were designed. 1 2 3 4 5
5 HR practices in this organization achieve their intended goals. 1 2 3 4 5
6 In our organization there is clear consistency between words and deedsof the HR department. 1 2 3 4 5
HRM Consensus
No Description
Stro
ngly
Disa
gree
Disa
gree
Neut
ral
Agre
e
Stro
ngly
Agre
e
1 The people in our organization responsible for HR have a mutualagreement about how to deal with employees. 1 2 3 4 5
2 If employees perform well, they get the necessary recognition and 1 2 3 4 5
229
Section C: Performance Appraisal QualityThe following set of statements describes your perceptions of performance appraisal quality in the appraisalprocess by your organization. For each statement, please indicate to which extent you feel it is agreeable or
disagreeable. Please Encircle or Tick () one answer. There is no right or wrong answer.
Section D: Psychological EmpowermentThe following set of statements describes your feeling or perception of being empowered in making decisionabout your work- and job-related activities and support from your organization. For each statement, please
indicate to which extent you feel it is agreeable or disagreeable. Please Encircle or Tick () one answer. Thereis no right or wrong answer.
rewards.
3 Employees consider promotions as fair in this organization. 1 2 3 4 5
4 The HR department in our organization takes decisions impartially. 1 2 3 4 5